Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tribology International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/triboint

Modeling of cutting force in MQL machining environment considering chip

tool contact friction
Bikash Chandra Behera *, Sudarsan Ghosh, P. Venkateswara Rao
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The present study deals with the prediction of machining forces under minimum quantity lubrication (MQL)
Sliding coefficient of friction environment by considering the contact length and chip thickness. The proposed methodology is an extension of
Force model Oxley's predictive machining theory (OPMT) to MQL machining. A novel approach to modify OPMT model has
Sticking-sliding contact zone been used to incorporate the effects of lubrication at the chip-tool interface. Dual contact zone theory (sticking-
MQL sliding) has been used to model the frictional force in MQL machining. A mechanistic model for the local coef-
ficient of friction (COF) has been developed as a function of cutting conditions and MQL parameters. The pro-
posed model predicts cutting forces, contact length and chip thickness under MQL environment with reasonable
accuracy and the same has been validated by experimental work.

1. Introduction
To understand the physics of the metal cutting process, various re-
searchers have been working in the direction since last three decades.
The most significant method used to understand the physics of machining
process is considered to be slip line field theory. Piispanen [1] and Earnst
[2] proposed the most popular card model of chip formation. Although it
is considered to be the best available basic model of chip formation but
information about shear angle was not explained much in detail. Mer-
chant [3] reported that the shear angle could be calculated if the friction
angle at chip-tool contact is known. Other pioneering works [4–6] were
contributed towards developing a more realistic model for metal
machining theory. However, Oxley and co-workers contribution in the
direction was found to be the most significant in establishing physics of
the metal cutting process. Oxley [7] and co-workers [8–10] introduced a
parallel sided shear zone theory (OPMT) for the modelling of orthogonal
cutting. They considered primary shear zone (PSZ) as alpha slip line and
secondary shear zone (SSZ) as beta slip line. The most significant feature
of their model was the use of temperature dependent flow stress to pre-
dict cutting forces and shear angle during machining. They also used
unknown parameter ðηÞ to tune their model and calculated these c,
δ and ϕ iteratively by using computer algorithm. However, the major
limitation of their model is its application to engineering materials other
than carbon steels. Adibi-Sedeh et al. [11] proposed a new methodology
to extend the OPMT for several classes of materials other than carbon
steels. The pressure distribution along the alpha slipline has been
calculated by considering the thermal and strain gradient effects along
the beta slip line. They used a methodology to eliminate the unknown
parameter ‘η’, which has been previously introduced by Oxley [7]. The
value of ‘η' was calculated by Oxley [7] using iterative approach. How-
ever, Adibi-Sedeh et al. [11], calculated the mid plane temperature by
integrating the plastic work and there by eliminated this parameter ‘η' in
their paper. The elimination of unknown parameter ‘η' save the compu-
tational time to carry out iterations.
Machining of Ni-based super alloys is very difficult under dry cutting
environment due to its poor thermal properties, high strength, and the
presence of hard carbides in its microstructure [12]. However, flood
cooling environment detrimentally affects the shop floor as well as
operator apart from its use and recycling costs [13]. MQL environment is
one of the major cutting environment considering sustainable machining
processes [13,14]. In literature, it has been reported that the typical flow
rate of MQL is 50–500 ml/h which is nearly three to four orders of
magnitude lower than the amount of the conventional cutting fluid used
in flood cooling [14–16]. The minimum use of cutting fluid also leads to
minimization of the cutting fluid cost, cleaning cost of the machine tool
and work floor. It also minimizes the health and occupational hazards
due to quick evaporation of droplets from the machining zone [14]. In
the MQL machining, the cutting fluid is atomized by compressed air and
then applied at the chip-tool contact [17]. The atomized droplets pene-
trate into the chip-tool interface and then lubricate the chip-tool contact

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: bikash.iitd@gmail.com (B.C. Behera).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2017.09.015
Received 14 May 2017; Received in revised form 30 July 2017; Accepted 14 September 2017
Available online 19 September 2017
0301-679X/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
B.C. Behera et al. Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295

Nomenclature t2 Chip thickness (mm)

U Cutting speed (m/s)
A Plastic equivalent strain (J-C equation) (N/mm2) Vchip ; Vs Chip speed and Shear speed (m/s)
As Area of PSZ (mm2) w Deformation work per unit volume in the PSZ (J/mm3)
B Strain related constant (J-C equation) (N/mm2) x Distance from tool tip along the SSZ (mm)
b Width of the workpiece (mm) α Rake angle (º)
C Strain rate constant (J-C equation) β Heat partition coefficient
Cp Specific heat of work material (J/g  C) γ_ int Shear strain rate at chip-tool contact (s1)
c Shear zone length to shear zone thickness ratio for PSZ δ The thickness of the shear zone to the chip thickness for
F Chip tool friction force (N) SSZ (mm)
FC Cutting force (along the direction of cutting speed) (N) ε Effective strain
FN Normal force on AB (normal to the cutting speed εint Effective strain at chip-tool contact
direction) (N) εAB Strain at AB
Fn Normal force obtained from tribotest (N) εEF Strain at EF
Fs Shear force (N) ε_ Strain rate (s1)
FT Thrust force (N) ε_ 0 Reference strain rate (s1)
Ft Tangential force obtained from tribotest (N) ε_ int Strain rate at chip-tool contact (s1)
F Chip-tool contact shear force (N) ε_ s Strain rate in PSZ (s1)
fMQL Flow rate of cutting fluid (ml/h) θ The angle made by primary shear plane with the resultant
H Total contact length (mm) force (º)
kAB ; kchip Shear flow stress on AB and on chip-tool contact (N/mm2) Δθc Mean temperature rise of the chip-tool due to secondary
kl Shear strength at the lower boundary of PSZ (N/mm2) shear (ºC)
ku Shear strength at the upper boundary of PSZ (N/mm2) Δθm Maximum temperature rise at tool-chip contact (ºC)
L Length of the shear plane AB (mm) λ Friction angle between R and N ( )
lp Sticking contact length (mm) μ Local COF (tool-chip contact)
m Temperature exponent (J-C equation) μchiptool Total COF at tool-chip contact zone
N Normal force at the tool-chip contact (N) ξ Characteristic of pressure distribution at chip-tool
n Strain hardening exponent (J-C equation) contact zone
PMQL Air pressure (bar) η The factor used for PSZ temperature
pa Hydrostatic pressure at the free surface of the nominal ϕ Shear angle (º)
shear plane (N/mm2) ρ Density (g/mm3)
pb Hydrostatic pressure at the SSZ (N/mm2) σ Flow stress (N/mm2)
R Resultant Cutting force (N) σ0 Maximum Pressure at tool-chip contact zone (N/mm2)
RT Thermal number σN Normal Stress at chip-tool interface determined from stress
T Temperature ( C) distribution at AB and boundary condition at B (N/mm2)
Tave Average temperature at chip-tool contact (ºC) σ_ N Average normal stress at chip-tool contact (N/mm2)
Tm Melting temperature (ºC) τs Energy based shear strength of PSZ (N/mm2)
Tmod Velocity modified temperature (ºC) ψ A constant calibration factor equal to the ratio of the
Tr Reference temperature (ºC) average temperature increase to the maximum temperature
Tw Room temperature (ºC) rise at chip-tool contact
t1 Uncut chip thickness (mm)

zone. Subsequently, application of cutting fluid through MQL minimizes
the COF and enhances the chip flow velocity over the rake surface. This
phenomenon reduces the chip-tool contact length that further decreases
cutting forces [18–21]. The reduction in frictional force at the chip-tool
interface minimizes the heat generated between the chip and tool. It
consumes the heat generated at the machining zone by evaporation of the
droplets, and it can also contribute to the cooling of the tool. Addition-
ally, the compressed air associated with the droplets carries away some
portion of heat from the machining zone. However, the effectiveness of
lubrication and cooling depend on the type of cutting fluid is used during
MQL machining.
Chetan et al. [19] investigated the effect of fluid flow rate during
machining of Ni-based superalloy under MQL mode. They reported that
the average main cutting force (311 N), feed force (201 N) were obtained
at 60 ml/h using biodegradable emulsion. At 125 ml/h flow rate, the
cutting force and feed force significantly reduced to 260 N and 150 N
respectively. However, by further increasing the flow rate to 250 ml/h,
the cutting force got reduced to 252 N and feed force to 144 N. Zhang
et al. [22] investigated the grinding characteristics of nano-MoS2 added
in soybean oil, palm oil, rapeseed oil and paraffin oil in MQL mode and
compared it with none MoS2 added MQL fluids. From their investigation,
they suggested that palm oil effectively minimizes the COF and specific
grinding energy with or without added MoS2 nanoparticles (NPs). The
high film forming property of carboxyl groups in palm oil could be the
major reason for such results. They also reported that when NPs are
added into the palm oil, the lubricating properties of palm oil increases
and reaches almost the same level as that of the conventional grinding
fluid. Soybean oil with 6% concentration NPs is the most suitable
grinding fluid considering both cooling and lubrication effect. This is
because soybean oil has 20% of the viscosity of the palm oil and this
enhances the cooling effect of the soybean oil compared to the palm oil.
In another study, Zhang et al. [23] investigated the effect of
MoS2/CNT hybrid nanofluids (NFs) when grinding of Ni-based alloy
under MQL mode. They used pure MoS2, pure CNT and the different
mixing ratio of MoS2/CNT NPs to prepare the NFs. The minimum COF
and the minimum surface roughness was obtained with MoS2/CNT (2:1)
NPs in the MQL grinding fluids. The results are attributed to the physical
synergistic effect of MoS2/CNT hybrid NPs that enhance the lubrication

284
B.C. Behera et al.
properties of the hybrid NFs. Wang et al. [24] studied the effect of water
based grinding fluid, pure palm oil, and palm oil based NFs on the
grindability of the Ni-based alloy. They applied palm oil and palm oil
based NFs in the grinding zone by MQL mode. They used SiO2, MoS2,
diamond (ND), CNTs, m-ZrO2, and αAl2O3 NPs to prepare the NFs and
better surface finish was obtained in case of pure palm oil under MQL
mode. Also minimum COF was obtained in work/wheel interface when
Al2O3 NFs were applied. The order of lubrication properties of NFs was
reported as: m-ZrO2 < CNTs < ND < MoS2 < SiO2 < αAl2O3.
Research work on turning of Inconel 718 under MQL environment so
far is mostly limited to tool wear [15,25], surface roughness [15] and
machining force [18]. The tangential cutting force is an important
machining response that directly affects the power consumed during the
machining process, and also affect the tool wear and dimensional accu-
racy of the machined surface. However, experimental studies are
time-consuming and expensive. Proper selection of cutting condition,
tool geometry, cutting fluid and MQL parameters involve rigorous
machining experiments. Till date, several numbers of force modelling
approaches have been documented for turning process. However, a
suitable cutting force model for machining of Inconel 718 under MQL
mode is still not present to the best of authors knowledge. Hence, there
exists a strong need for developing a cutting force model which can
precisely predict the cutting force and thrust force in addition to sticking
contact length and sliding contact length under MQL mode.
Banerjee and Sharma [26,27] experimentally and numerically stud-
ied the MQL machining of Ti-6Al-4V. They proposed a specific energy
model and reported that their model is in reasonable agreement with the
experimental results. They used finite element method (FEM) to predict
the specific energy although, FEM techniques are costly and time-
consuming. It is hard to establish the large plastic deformation model
with finite element methods because elemental distortion at high strain
rates is involved in machining simulations [28]. Zhang et al. [29] pro-
posed a force model for grinding, by considering plastic-stacking and
material removal mechanism. Scratch tests were conducted to determine
the critical cutting depth for ploughing and cutting states. Cutting effi-
ciency parameter was introduced to determine the force algorithm of the
individual grain. They also considered the effect of lubrication in their
model and conducted tribotest between the workpiece and wheel ma-
terial to evaluate the COF under dry, conventional, MQL and nMQL en-
vironments. The proposed model was found suitable to predict the
grinding forces for dry, conventional, MQL and nMQL environments.
Yang et al. [30] developed a model for the ductile-brittle transition
mechanism by considering critical maximum undeformed chip thickness
under various lubrication environments such as dry, conventional, MQL
and nMQL. The model is based on the analysis of ductile-brittle transition
characteristics by using the geometry and kinematics of ductile mode of
grinding. The lubrication condition affects the normal force results which
in turn influence the critical maximum undeformed chip thickness. The
proposed model is suitable to predict the critical maximum undeformed
chip thickness when grinding zirconia under MQL, conventional, dry and
nMQL environment. Li and Liang [31] were probably the first researchers
to develop a physics-based model for near dry machining environment.
They extended the OPMT by modifying the COF originally proposed by
Oxley [7] in dry machining environment to near dry machining. The
boundary layer lubrication effect at contact surface was considered to
incorporate the friction model. However, they focused only the flank face
instead of at chip-tool interface. The model was validated by machining
AISI 1045 steel under MQL mode. Ji et al. [32] proposed a force model
for MQL machining similar to the Li and Liang [31] and validated their
model by machining AISI 9310 and AISI 1040. The limitation of their
model was that they utilized single contact zone theory which was
originally proposed by Oxley [7]. In single contact zone theory, the COF
is taken as constant throughout the chip-tool contact that in the actual
case does not replicate the actual machining interface conditions.
The literature necessitates the development of a suitable force model
for machining under MQL environment, particularly for machining of
285
Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295
high strength material like Ni-based superalloys. The aim of this article is
to develop a force model for machining under MQL mode considering the
effect of machining parameters, physical properties of work material, and
MQL parameters as flow rate and pressure. The modelling approach is
based on the extension of OPMT. A dual contact zone theory originally
proposed by Zorev [33] has been utilized for modelling the frictional
characteristics at chip-tool contact zone. In single contact zone theory the
variation in COF at the chip-tool contact has been neglected or has been
assumed to be uniform [7,31]. However, in dual contact zone theory, the
chip-tool contact zone is considered as two different sticking and sliding
contact regimes. The COF is not uniform throughout the chip-tool contact
as chip load on rake face varies from tool tip to chip separation point. The
friction varies according to chip load and contact phenomenon for sliding
friction and sticking friction differently. Further, tribo-test has been
conducted to calculate the sliding COF at sliding contact zone. The J-C
constitutive model has been used for work material properties, and the
PSZ temperature has been calculated using Adibi-Sedeh et al. [11]
original approach. For validation of the estimated cutting force and
thrust force, turning experiments on Inconel 718 under MQL environ-
ment have been performed. Additionally total and sticking contact length
at the chip-tool interface have been predicted and validated with the
experimental results.
2. Methodology for the proposed model
The algorithm for proposed model used to analyze the stress distri-
bution along shear plane and the chip-tool interface is as follows:
 Dual contact zone (sticking-sliding) theory has been incorporated in
OPMT to characterize the frictional force at the chip-tool interface.
 The local COF at the slipping contact zone have been evaluated by
conducting sliding tests and a mechanistic model for local COF has
been developed. This model is a function of flow rate, chip velocity,
and air pressure.
 An iterative computer based method has been used to evaluate the
shear zone length to shear zone thickness ratio for PSZ ðcÞ, the
thickness of the shear zone to the chip thickness for SSZ ðδÞ and shear
angle (ϕ). Once the values of c; δ and ϕ are known, the machining
forces and other parameters can be calculated by Oxley's machining
theory.
2.1. Basic assumptions
The basic assumptions that have been used to simplify the multi
physics problem are given below:
 Machining is orthogonal.
 Tool wear effects are negligible.
 The effect of the temperature gradient is negligible.
 Hydrostatic pressure distribution along AB is linear.
 Only lubrication effect takes place in the sliding contact zone.
 No heat loss in PSZ and SSZ (Adiabatic conditions are assumed).
Oxley and Welsh [34] proposed the parallel side shear zone model of
chip formation which is demonstrated in Fig. 1 (a). During continuous
chip formation, a narrow zone AB is assumed to be formed which runs
from principal cutting edge to the chip/work free surface as shown in
Fig. 1 (b). This narrow zone is zoomed up and represented from
tool-work (CD) to chip-work (EF) in Fig. 1 (b) [7,35]. It is assumed that
AB is equidistant from CD and EF and AB, CD, and EF are all slip lines. It is
also assumed that the cutting speed changes to chip speed through the
shear zone with no discontinuity in speed and the resultant force is not
transmitted to the center of the plane AB.
From Fig. 1, the relation between shear plane (AB) of nominal length
L and the uncut chip thickness (t1 ) can be represented as
B.C. Behera et al. Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295

Fig. 1. Chip formation model (a) Oxley's model [7,34] (b) Simplified parallel sided shear zone [35].

t1
L¼ (1)
sin∅ Table 1
J-C parameters for Inconel 718 [36].
Similarly, the shear velocity ðVs Þ, strain along AB ðγ AB Þ and chip
A B n C m Tm
thickness ðt2 Þ can be obtained using the following equations.
1290 MPa 895 MPa 0.526 0.016 1.55 1300  C
U cos α
Vs ¼ (2)
cosð∅  αÞ

cos α



m 
γ AB ¼ (3) ε_ T  Tr
2 sin∅cosð∅  αÞ σ ¼ ðA þ Bεn Þ 1 þ Cln 1 (11)
ε0 Tm  Tr

t1 cosð∅  αÞ
t2 ¼ (4)
sin∅ 2.3. Calculation of shear zone temperature
The cutting force (Fc ), thrust force (FT ) and the resultant force (R) and
The temperature at AB and temperature at EF of the PSZ as shown in
their mutual relations as shown in Fig. 1 can be obtained from the
Fig. 1 are calculated based on Adibi-Sedeh et al. [11] instead of Oxley's
following equations.
original proposed model to eliminate the unknown parameter 'η'. The
Fc ¼ R cosðλ  αÞ (5) temperature at AB can be calculated using the following equation.



T ρCP ðTÞ B nþ1 ε_ S
FT ¼ R sinðλ  αÞ (6) ∫ TAB
m dT ¼ ð1  βÞ AεAB þ εAB 1 þ Cln (12)
W nþ1 ε_ 0
1  TTT r
m Tr

Fs ¼ kAB Lw (7) The heat partition co-efficient ‘β’ calculated at TAB and strain rate ‘_εS ’
are assumed to be constant throughout the shear zone. εAB and ε_ S can be
F ¼ R sin λ (8) calculated using following equations.

cos α
N ¼ R cos λ (9) εAB ¼ pffiffiffi (13)
2 3cosðϕ  αÞsin ϕ

Fs kAB Vs
R¼ ¼ (10) ε_ S ¼ c (14)
cos θ sin∅cos θ L

2.2. Constitutive material model for workpiece flow stress The temperature at the upper part (EF) of the shear zone can be
calculated using Equation (15).
For generalized modelling approach, the material behavior has to be


T ρCP ðTÞ B nþ1 ε_ S
known under machining condition. In this work, J-C material model has ∫ TEF
m dT ¼ ð1  βÞ AεEF þ εEF 1 þ Cln
W nþ1 ε_ 0
been used to represent the material flow stress. DeMange et al. [36] 1  TTT r
m Tr
conducted Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) experiments to identify
the material constants for a J-C material model of age hardened Inconel (15)
718 and various material parameters as obtained are given in Table 1.
where, εEF ¼ 2εAB and the above temperature equations can be solved
Jafarian et al. [37] used these material constants for FEM based esti-
iteratively.
mation of cutting force during machining of Inconel 718. They compared
the J-C material model with other material models and concluded that
J-C material model is best for cutting simulation. So in this present study, 2.4. Calculation of shear force along the PSZ
the J-C material constant adapted by DeMange et al. [36] have been used,
and the same is represented by the below given equation. The deformation work per unit volume w is obtained by integrating
the total strain energy as shown below:

286
B.C. Behera et al. Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295

F sin ϕ
T
∫ TEF ρCp ðTÞdT Δθc ¼ (26)
ε ρCp bt1 cosðϕ  αÞ
w ¼ ∫ 0EF σdε ¼ W
(16)
ð1  βÞ
The average temperature (Tave ) at the chip-tool contact can be
Shear force Fs and shear stress τs can obtained by using calculated by using a constant ψ as shown in Equation (27).
following equations:
Tave ¼ TEF þ ψΔθm (27)
Fs Vs ¼ wUt1 b (17)
Knowing the average temperature ðTave Þ, strain (εint ) and strain rate
(_εint ) along the chip-tool contact, the shear strength of the material ðkchip Þ
Fs wUt1
τs ¼ ¼ (18) can be evaluated using Equation (28).
As Vs L




m 
1
ε_ int Tave  Tr
kchip ¼ pffiffiffi A þ Bεnint 1 þ Cln 1 (28)
2.5. Calculation of hydrostatic pressure at cutting edge and normal stress 3 ε0 Tm  Tr
at chip-tool contact
2.7. Dual contact zone model at chip-tool contact
The calculation is similar to Oxley's [7] expression for pa , but instead
of using the shear strength at the midplane of the shear zone, energy The contact problem between tool and chip in metal machining the-
equivalent shear strength has been utilized in the present work. The ories is very complex. The COF at the chip-tool contact zone is the rela-
requirement for equilibrium of the shear zone dictates that the hydro- tion between normal force and frictional force over the tool surface. In
static pressure at point B ðpb Þ in Fig. 1 be related to the hydrostatic stress previous models, the COF at the chip-tool contact has been neglected or
at point A ðpa Þ by has been assumed to be uniform [7,31]. Roth and Oxley [38] were
probably the first researchers to use slip line field theory to obtain stress
pb  pa ¼ ðku  kl ÞC (19)
distribution along the tool-chip interface. Stress singularities exist at the
ku and kl are the shear strengths at the upper and lower parts of the PSZ. chip exit from the rake face however no significant explanation for these
Once the strain, strain rate and temperature along the upper and lower singularities is explained. Later on, Oxley [7] concluded that there is no
boundaries of the PSZ are known then ku and kl can be obtained. The sliding contact interface, and hence a plastic state of stress of the chip is
angle (θ) as shown in Fig. 1 can be evaluated by using the pressure achieved over the full contact length. The results reported by Oxley is in
variation and shear stress along the shear plane as depicted by Equa- indirect conflicts with the past literature where the region contact zone
tion (20). was divided into two parts (sticking contact and sliding contact) [33,
39,40].
 π  cðk  k Þ Zorev [33] reported a more realistic dual contact zone (stick-
θ ¼ tan1 1 þ 2  1 
u l
(20) ing-sliding) theory based on normal stress and shear stress variation
4 2τs
along the chip-tool contact zone. Experiments were conducted to study
The normal and tangential components, N and F, of the resultant the stress variation at chip-tool contact. It was reported that the normal
cutting force on the tool rake surface can be obtained in relation to Fs by stress is maximum at the principal cutting edge and then gradually re-
Equations (21) and (22). duces to zero where the chip separates from the rake face. The chip exit
from the PSZ and contact with the tool rake face with a high normal
Fs
N¼ cosðθ  ϕ  αÞ (21) pressure. That normal pressure decreases from the principal cutting edge
cos θ to the contact where chip separate from the rake face. The separate zones
of higher and lower normal pressure contact zones are defined as sticking
Fs
F¼ sinðθ  ϕ  αÞ (22) zone and sliding contact zone respectively. In sticking zone, normal
cos θ pressure is very high and equal to the flow stress (kchip ) of the material
By putting value of Fs as obtained from Equation (17), in Equations which is machined. In sliding contact, normal pressure is small and,
(21) and (22), values of N and F can be obtained. The normal stress (σ N ) Coulomb friction law is suitably applicable for calculated the COF. Zorev
which is related to the pressure at point B (pb ) and the shear stress (τs ) at [33] and other researchers [41–43] reported that the COF at chip-tool
the chip-tool contact can be written as contact zone is larger than 1 and their stress distribution is represented
in Fig. 2 (a). However, other researchers [39,40,44,45] also reported that
σ N ¼ pb þ 2τs ðϕ  αÞ (23) the COF at the chip-tool contact zone is less than 1 and their normal stress
The average normal stress (σ_ N ) at the chip-tool contact can be and shear stress distribution at rake face is shown in Fig. 2 (b). Astakhov
calculated using the given Equation (24). and Outeiro [46] estimated the contact stress distribution at the chip-tool
contact zone and reported that the normal stress distribution at the
N tool-chip contact zone is not uniform. The normal stress distribution in
σ_ N ¼ (24)
Hb their work is similar with the Zorev's experimental observations. How-
ever, the shear stress distribution is slightly differs from the Zorev's
2.6. Estimating temperature at the chip-tool contact zone observation.
In this model, dual contact zone theory is considered and assumed
The temperature at SSZ is the function of total contact length (H), that chip-tool contact zone is divided into sticking contact zone and
chip thickness (t2 ), thermal number (Rt ) and the relative thickness of SSZ sliding contact zone. The normal stress (σ n ) at the chip-tool contact zone
(δ). The ratio between the maximum temperature rise at the SSZ (Δθm ) gradually decreases from the cutting edge to the zone where the chip
and the temperature rise of the chip (Δθc ) is calculated using the below leaves from the tool and the shear stress (τ) is maximum at nearest to the
given Equation (25) [10]. cutting tip shown in Fig. 2. However, the shear stress distribution along

m
 the tool-chip interface is more complicated. According to plastic flow
Δθm Rt t2 Rt t2 criterion, shear stress does not exceed the flow stress of the material
¼ 0:06  0:195δ þ 0:05log10 (25)
Δθc H H being machined. So the shear stress distribution at rake surface of the
cutting insert can be written as given in Equation (29).
The mean chip temperature (Δθc ) can be calculated by using the

287
B.C. Behera et al. Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295

Fig. 2. Dual contact zone model (a) μchiptool > 1 [29,32–34] (b) μchiptool < 1 [39,40,44,45].


τ ¼ kchip when x  lp and τ ¼ μσ when lp  x  H (29) le
F ¼ kchip b lp þ (34)
ξþ1
The normal stress ðσ n Þ distribution at rake face is given in Equation
(30). The normal stress distribution as obtained from Equation (30) has
been validated experimentally for metallic materials [39,47].
2.7.1. Development of a mechanistic model for local COF at the chip-tool
 x ξ contact
σn ¼ σ0 1 (30) The basic principle mostly adopted to characterize the friction at the
H
chip-tool contact is pin on disc test. However, in pin on disc test, the pin is
The value of the pressure distribution characteristic (ξ) is taken as always rubbed over the same work surface [50]. Hedenqvist and Olsson
3 [48]. [51] were probably the first researchers who modified the pin on the disc
Maximum stress ðσ 0 Þ along the chip-tool interface can be calcu- to pin on the ring. A specially designed pin holder is used instead of tool
lated [47]. holder on the same lathe where the machining experiments have been
conducted. The merit of this setup is that the pin always rubbed the new
t1 ðξ  1Þ cos λ
σ 0 ¼ kchip (31) surface of the workpiece instead of rubbing with the same surface as done
H sin ϕ cosðϕ þ λ  αÞ
in pin on disc test. A spring loading system is used on the tool holder to
Total contact length and sticking contact length can be calculated by keep a constant normal pressure. The setup is improved by Claudin et al.
Equations (32) and (33) respectively [49]. [52] by modifying the spring loading setup with a pneumatic jack.
Courbon et al. [53] studied the tribological behavior between Inconel
ξ þ 2 sinðϕ þ λ  αÞ 718 and Ti-6Al-4V with carbide pin to evaluate the friction at the
H ¼ t1 (32)
2 sin ϕ cos λ chip-tool interface. They used the similar tribo test for their study and
reported that COF not reduced in cryogenic environment. However, they

1 !
suggested that their study can be used in numerical modelling of
kchip ξ
lp ¼ H  þ1 (33) machining. The efficiency of this setup has also been proved by other
σ0 μ
researchers [54–56].
The friction force F at the rake surface can be obtained using Equation In the present work, a similar sliding friction test has been conducted
(34) [49]. to determine the local COF (μ) under MQL environment. The details of
MQL setup (Fig. 3) has been given in a previous study [18]. Air atomized
external mixing nozzle has been used for the mist generation. Metal

Fig. 3. Schematic presentation of MQL setup.

288
B.C. Behera et al. Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295

Table 2
Process parameters and their levels.

Parameter Levels

2 1 0 1 2

Sliding speed (m/s) 0.372 0.458 0.583 0.708 0.793

Flow rate (ml/h) 65 100 150 200 235
Air pressure (bar) 3.3 4 5 6 6.6

roughness less than Ra ¼ 0:2 μm.

The pin was held in a pin holder as shown in Fig. 5 and the entire
setup is placed on a piezoelectric dynamometer (Make-Kistler, Model No
9129AA). The nozzle tip is situated at a distance of 54±3 mm from the
pin tip, and the axis of the spray makes an angle of 27.9 with the axis of
the workpiece. The pin is sliding in a helical path on the rotating work
surface. The forces acting on the pin have been measured by a 3D
piezoelectric dynamometer. These are the normal force ðFn Þ and
tangential force ðFt Þ and a typical force variation with time is depicted in
Fig. 6. Hydraulic jack equipped with the CNC turning center (Lead well
Fig. 4. (a) Geometry of carbide (WC-6Co) pin (b) Manufactured pins.

Table 3
Matrix of experimental design and their responses.

2
μ ¼ 3:035  3:23Vchip  0:007 fMQL  0:31PMQL þ 1:77Vchip
þ 0:0174P2MQL þ 0:001Vchip fMQL þ 0:089Vchip PMQL
þ 0:0003fMQL PMQL (36)

Run order Sliding speed (m/s) Flow rate (ml/h) Pressure (bar) μ¼ Ft
Fn

1 1 1 1 0.661
2 1 1 1 0.494
3 1 1 1 0.493
4 1 1 1 0.403
5 1 1 1 0.532
Fig. 5. Experimental setup for sliding test. 6 1 1 1 0.457
7 1 1 1 0.476
8 1 1 1 0.383
working oil (Castrol Hyspray E 2000, Viscosity 28 cSt at 40  C) is used as 9 2 0 0 0.681
10 2 0 0 0.377
the cutting fluid. 11 0 2 0 0.658
The sliding test for sliding COF has been carried out in a CNC turning 12 0 2 0 0.433
center (Lead well T6). Pin for sliding test has been fabricated, and its 13 0 0 2 0.582
geometry is shown in Fig. 4. The material used for the fabricated pin is 14 0 0 2 0.417
15 0 0 0 0.408
similar to the cutting tool tip (90%WC-10%Co). The pin is considered as
16 0 0 0 0.409
tool rake surface, and the workpiece surface is considered as chip surface. 17 0 0 0 0.46
Inconel 718 (Ni-50.18%, C-0.08%, Cr-17.78%, Fe-22.32%, Nb-4.88%, 18 0 0 0 0.445
Mo-3.07%, Ti-1.14%, and Al-0.23%) of 100ϕ  300 mm has been used as 19 0 0 0 0.403
work surface. The work piece finish machined to achieve a surface 20 0 0 0 0.423

Fig. 6. Representation of normal and tangential forces obtained in tribotest (air pressure 3.3 bar, flow rate 150 ml/h, sliding speed 0.583 m/s).

289
B.C. Behera et al.
T6) was used to keep a constant normal pressure on the pin. The pin was
rubbed against the fresh work surface under MQL environment. Flow
rate, air pressure, and chip speed are the variables used in the current
sliding test. The sliding speed is a function of speed, uncut chip thickness
and chip thickness as given in Equation (35).
Ut1
Vchip ¼ (35)
t2
For each friction test, new pin and fresh work surface have been used.
The tribometer was initially used to validate the COF with previous
literature [57–59].
Central Composite Design (CCD) methodology has been used to
design the experiments. CCD is the most popular class of second order
quadratic design reported in past literature [60]. Its application to
machining and related area are still in trend to minimize the experi-
mental runs [61]. The parameters and their coded levels and actual
values that are used for the experiments are given in Table 2. The sliding
speed is selected on the basis of pin-work material combination. The
selected cutting speed is below 80 m/min which is below the transition
speed (100 m/min) at which continuous chips get to convert to
segmented chips. Lorentzon et al. [62] reported that above 100 m/min
Fig. 7. Flow chart of algorithm.
290
Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295
cutting speed Inconel 718, the continuous chip gets converted to
segmented chip in dry cutting condition. The sliding test parameters
combination and their response sliding COF is shown in Table 3. For
better statistical accuracy each friction test has been conducted thrice,
and its average value has been taken for analysis. The generalized
quadratic model for local COF is given by Equation (36). The R-square
and R-square (adj.) value for the model (Equation (36)) is 89.84% and
80.70% respectively. This value indicates that a strong correlation exists
between inputs and response.
3. Model solution
An iterative numerical scheme in MATLAB® is used to solve the
equations (Equation (1) to Equation (36)) over possible values of process
parameters. The stresses are calculated along the shear zone as a function
of cutting condition, material properties (J-C constant), shear angle and
MQL parameters (flow rate and air pressure). The shear angle (ϕ) is
determined iteratively when F is equal to F. If above mentioned condition
is satisfied by more than two shear angle than the higher value is chosen.
The values c and δ are selected iteratively simultaneously with the shear
angle as shown by the algorithm in Fig. 7. For a given value of ϕ, c and δ,
B.C. Behera et al. Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295

Table 4 Table 5
Mechanical properties of Inconel 718 [63]. Cutting condition for verifying the predicted values (width of cut 0.5 mm).

Tensile strength 1310 MPa Test Input parameters

Yield strength 1110 MPa No
Speed Uncut chip Rake Flow rate Pressure
Elastic modulus 206 GPa
(m/s) thickness (mm) angle ( ) (ml/h) (bar)
Vickers Hardness (HV100) 427–454
Density 8190 kg/m3 1 1.17 0.1 6 75 3.6

Melting point 1300 C 2 1.17 0.2 6 225 3.6
Thermal conductivity 11.2 W/mK 3 0.84 0.2 7 75 3.6
Specific heat capacity 0.435 KJ/KgK 4 0.84 0.1 7 225 3.6
5 1.17 0.1 7 75 6.6
6 1.17 0.2 7 225 6.6
7 0.84 0.2 6 75 6.6
the cutting force (Equation (5)), thrust force (Equation (6)), chip thick- 8 0.84 0.1 6 225 6.6
ness (Equation (4)), total tool-chip contact length (Equation (32)) and
sticking contact length (Equation (33)) are predicted using the algorithm.

4. Model validation

Experiments have been conducted to validate the predictive force

model. Inconel 718 having an external diameter of 80 mm has been used
for machining. Table 4 illustrates the mechanical properties of Inconel
718. Experimental data have been collected and compared with the
predicted forces. Additionally, chip-tool contact length and chip thick-
ness are also experimentally evaluated and compared with those ob-
tained through analytical equations.
A tool force dynamometer (the same used for the sliding test) has
been used to acquire cutting forces. The chip-tool contact length is
measured by using scanning electron microscope (SEM) as shown in
Fig. 8. The MQL setup and CNC turning center used for cutting experi-
ments are the same as that utilized in the sliding test. The cutting para-
metric conditions are given in Table 5. Carbide insert (90%WC-10%Co)
has been used for machining test. The cutting inserts in conjunction with
tool holder provided the tool geometry with principal cutting edge angle
90 , clearance angle 5 , and rake angle 6 and 7 . Each experiment has
been repeated thrice to minimize the experimental measurement error,
Fig. 9. Cutting forces tracked by dynamometer during turning operation (width of cut:
and the standard error bar is utilized to show the stability of the exper- 0.5 mm, rake angle:6 , uncut chip thickness:0.15 mm, cutting speed:0.84 m/s flow rate:
imental results. 150 ml/h, and air pressure: 5.1 bar).

4.1. Validation of machining forces
The cutting forces obtained through the dynamometer during the
machining operation is shown in Fig. 9. The estimated and measured
cutting forces are shown in Fig. 10. The percentage prediction error has
been calculated using Equation (37).


Experimental  Predicted
Error ð%Þ ¼  100
Experimental
The prediction error for cutting forces is varying from 3.57% to
12.17% as shown in Fig. 10 (b). Fig. 11 illustrates the measured and
predicted thrust forces. The thrust force prediction error varies from
3.42% to 15.87% as illustrated in Fig. 11 (b). The average prediction
error for cutting force has also been calculated using Equation (38).
P
Predicted error for each test
Average error ð%Þ ¼ (38)
Total number of test
However, the average estimation error for cutting and thrust force are
6.53% and 8.3% respectively. The predicted cutting and thrust force values
are found to be consistently lower from the measured values. This trend
may be attributed to the high chemical affinity of Inconel 718 due to which
built up layer (BUL) and BUE forms on the rake surface. The formation of
(37) BUE and BUL changes the actual cutting geometry of the cutting insert.
Hence additional fluctuation in force can be observed during experiments.
In the proposed model, neither the effect of chemical affinity nor the factor
to consider the fluctuation of forces due to BUL and BUE formation have
been incorporated, and hence possibly the deviation is observed. Pro-
gressive tool wear effects are also not considered in this proposed model

Fig. 8. Representation of chip-tool contact length.

291
B.C. Behera et al.
Fig. 10. (a) Comparison of experimental and predicted result of cutting force. (b) Per-
centage of error in predicted cutting force.
Fig. 11. (a) Comparison of predicted and experimental result for thrust force (b) Per-
centage of error in predicted thrust force.
that may be another reason for the deviation of forces as tool wear strongly
affects the cutting force. Further, the effects such as plastic deformation of
cutting edge, flaking, chipping and edge fracture are also not incorporated
in the model and these may be considered as potential sources of deviation
of the predicted forces from the experimental results.
292
Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295
Fig. 12. Variation of cutting force with (width of cut 0.5 mm, flow rate: 150 ml/h, air
pressure: 5.1 bar, rake angle:6 ) (a) Cutting speed (b) Uncut chip thickness.
Fig. 12 (a) depicts the trend of cutting force with cutting speed and
Fig. 12 (b) presents the trend of cutting force with the uncut chip
thickness. It is clearly seen that the predicted cutting forces follow the
same trend with the measured values. The predicted forces are closer to
the experimental cutting forces. However, in some cases, the predicted
forces are underestimated with the measured values. This deviation of
cutting force may be related to the assumption that the proper lubrication
can't occur due to BUE formation at the cutting tip. The effect of BUE
formation during turning and tool wear effect have been neglected in this
work. Other tool wear effects such as formation BUL, abrasion wear,
adhesion of chip debris, flaking and fracturing are not considered in this
proposed model.
4.2. Validation of chip-tool contact length
Fig. 13 compares the experimental and predicted total contact length
and sticking contact length values. As shown in Fig. 13 (a), predicted
results of total contact length is closer to the experimental observation.
However, as evident from Fig. 13 (b), the predicted sticking contact
length deviates significantly from the measured data in Test 3, Test 5,
Test 6 and Test 7. The method used in this present work for sticking
contact length measurement along with the formation of BUL during
machining process have possibly induced such error.
4.3. Validation of chip thickness
Fig. 14 compares the predicted and measured chip thickness. The
error in prediction for chip thickness varies from 0.7% to 15.95%. The
predicted values of the chip thickness are in good agreement with the
measured values although the predicted values are underestimated from
the measured chip thickness. This is attributed to the saw-tooth chips
produced during machining of Inconel 718. The literature reported that
the mechanism of saw-tooth chip formation is due to (a) crack generation
at the free surface of the chip [64] (b) catastrophic strain localization
[65], and (c) both catastrophic strain localization and crack generation at
the free surface of the chip [66]. However, the chip formed in nickel
B.C. Behera et al.
Fig. 13. Comparison of predicted and experimental result for (a) Total contact length (b)
Sticking contact length.
based alloys are typically saw-tooth [67]. This is because in Inconel 718
machining the shear localization at the PSZ is severe and gets highly
influenced by cutting speed [68]. It's poor thermal conductivity, and
severe strain hardening during machining process are the reason behind
the saw-tooth chips formed during machining.
5. Simulation results
Cutting force, contact length, sticking contact length and shear angle are
predicted at different flow rates of the cutting fluid in MQL mode. Fig. 15
shows the variation of total contact length, sticking contact length, shear
angle and cutting force with machining speed. Total contact length and
sticking contact length decreases with increasing in speed and flow rate as
shown in Fig. 15 (a) and Fig. 15 (b). As shown in Fig. 15 (c), the shear angle
increases with both machining speed and cutting fluid flow rate. This can be
attributed to a reduction in chip thickness at higher cutting speed and,
lubrication effect increases at an increased flow rate of cutting fluid. As
Fig. 14. Comparison of predicted and experimental result for chip thickness.
293
Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295
shown in Fig. 15 (d) the cutting force is significantly reduced when flow rate
increases from 75 ml/h to 150 ml/h. However, a further increase in the flow
rate does not affect the cutting force. This is attributed to a flow rate above
150 ml/h, where the COF at the chip-tool contact did not significantly
change. Setti et al. [20] reported that the COF between grinding wheel and
Ti-6Al-4V surface got reduced in MQL mode. The main reason for the
reduction in COF is proposed by them is due to better penetration of cutting
fluid in the grinding zone under MQL environment.
Fig. 16 depicts the variation of total contact length, sticking contact
length, shear angle and cutting force variation with cutting speed and
air pressure. It is also observed that when air pressure increases from
3.6 to 5.1 bar the sticking and total contact length and cutting force
reduce significantly. The possible reason might be that at high air
pressure, the stream of small droplets is more coherent and subse-
quently they are able to easily penetrate inside the chip-tool contact
[69]. Another reason might be with increase in air pressure the number
of droplets increases and the size of the droplets decreases [19]. The
smaller size droplets easily penetrate into the chip tool contact, and
that leads to minimize the COF. However, above 5.1 bar air pressure,
the total and the sticking contact length do not get signifi-
cantly reduced.
The shear angle is marginally increased, and the reduction of cutting
force is not significantly changed. At 1.3 m/s, shear angle increases from
21.22 to 21.35 shown in Fig. 16 (c) and cutting force is reduced from
303.73 N to 302.8 N as illustrated in Fig. 16 (d). The possible reason
might be the low lubrication effect generated by the air pressure above
5.1 bar at the chip-tool contact.
6. Conclusions
In this work, a force model is proposed for machining of Inconel 718
under MQL mode. OPMT has been modified by incorporating the realistic
frictional characteristics at the chip-tool contact. The novelty of this
model is the introduction of dual contact zone theory (sticking-sliding)
instead of single contact zone theory to model the chip-tool contact
relation. Additionally, a mechanistic model has been developed to pre-
dict the COF in sliding contact as a function of MQL parameters and
cutting parameters. The sliding contact friction has been evaluated by
using an indigenous tribometer especially designed for turning opera-
tion. The proposed model estimated cutting force, thrust force, chip
thickness and the chip-tool contact length. The predicted values of cut-
ting force, thrust force, chip thickness and chip tool contact length are in
good agreement with the measured values. The average estimation error
for cutting force and thrust force are 6.53% and 8.3% respectively. It is
also observed from the predicted results that both sticking contact length
B.C. Behera et al. Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295

Fig. 15. Simulation results for (width of cut: 0.5 mm, rake angle:6 , uncut chip thickness: 0.15 mm and, air pressure 5.1 bar) (a) Total contact length (b) Sticking contact length (c)
Solution point shear angle (d) Cutting force.

Fig. 16. Simulation results for (width of cut: 0.05 mm, rake angle:6 , uncut chip thickness: 0.15 mm and, flow rate 150 ml/h) (a) Total contact length (b) Sticking contact length (c)
Solution point shear angle (d) Cutting force.

(lp ) and total chip-tool contact length (H) significantly decreases with an
increase in flow rate and air pressure. The proposed model will provide
an impetus for widespread usage of the MQL process as it incorporates
the chip tool contact frictional characteristics in a realistic manner. The
influence of the droplet size and droplet distributions may be incorpo-
rated in proposing any future models.
References
[1] Piispanen V. Theory of formation of metal chips. J Appl Phys 1948;19:876–81.
[2] Earnst H. Physics of metal cutting. In: Machining metals. Cleveland, Ohio: American
Society of Metals; 1938. p. 1–34.
[3] Merchant ME. Mechanics of the metal cutting process. I. Orthogonal cutting and a
type 2 chip. J Appl Phys 1945;16:267–75.

294
B.C. Behera et al.
[4] Lee EH, Shaffer BW. The theory of plasticity applied to a problem of machining.
J Appl Mech 1951;73:405–13.
[5] Dewhurst P. On the non-uniqueness of the machining process. Proc R Soc Lond A
Math Phys Sci 1978;360:587–610.
[6] Fang N, Jawahir IS, Oxley PLB. A universal slip-line model with non-unique
solutions for machining with curled chip formation and a restricted contact tool. Int
J Mech Sci 2001;43:557–80.
[7] Oxley PLB. The mechanics of machining: an analytical approach to assessing
machinability. West sussex, England: Ellis Horwood; 1989.
[8] Lin GCI, Mathew P, Oxley PLB, Watson AR. Predicting cutting forces for oblique
machining conditions. Proc Inst Mech Eng 1982;196:141–8.
[9] Fenton RG, Oxley PLB. Mechanics of orthogonal machining: allowing for the effects
of strain rate and temperature on tool-chip friction. Proc Inst Mech Eng 1968;183:
417–38.
[10] Stevenson MG, Oxley PLB. An experimental investigation of the influence of speed
and scale on the strain-rate in a zone of intense plastic deformation. Proc Inst Mech
Eng 1969;184:561–76.
[11] Adibi-Sedeh AH, Madhavan V, Bahr B. Extension of Oxley's analysis of machining to
use different material models. J Manuf Sci Eng 2003;125:656–66.
[12] Thakur DG, Ramamoorthy B, Vijayaraghavan L. Study on the machinability
characteristics of superalloy Inconel 718 during high speed turning. Mater Des
2009;30:1718–25.
[13] Davim JP. Green manufacturing processes and systems. Springer; 2013.
[14] Chetan, Ghosh S, Venkateswara Rao P. Application of sustainable techniques in
metal cutting for enhanced machinability: a review. J Clean Prod 2015;100:17–34.
[15] Dhar NR, Kamruzzaman M, Ahmed M. Effect of minimum quantity lubrication
(MQL) on tool wear and surface roughness in turning AISI-4340 steel. J Mater
Process Technol 2006;172:299–304.
[16] Khan MMA, Mithu MAH, Dhar NR. Effects of minimum quantity lubrication on
turning AISI 9310 alloy steel using vegetable oil-based cutting fluid. J Mater Process
Technol 2009;209:5573–83.
[17] Giasin K, Ayvar-Soberanis S, Hodzic A. The effects of minimum quantity lubrication
and cryogenic liquid nitrogen cooling on drilled hole quality in GLARE fibre metal
laminates. Mater Des 2016;89:996–1006.
[18] Behera BC, Chetan, Setti D, Ghosh S, Rao PV. Spreadability studies of metal working
fluids on tool surface and its impact on minimum amount cooling and lubrication
turning. J Mater Process Technol 2017;244:1–16.
[19] Chetan, Behera BC, Ghosh S, Rao PV. Application of nanofluids during minimum
quantity lubrication: a case study in turning process. Tribol Int 2016;101:234–46.
[20] Setti D, Sinha MK, Ghosh S, Rao PV. Performance evaluation of Ti-6Al-4V grinding
using chip formation and coefficient of friction under the influence of nanofluids.
Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2015;88:237–48.
[21] Setti D, Ghosh S, Rao PV. Influence of nanofluid application on wheel wear,
coefficient of friction and redeposition phenomenon in surface grinding of Ti-6Al-
4V. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0954405416636039.
[22] Zhang Y, Li C, Jia D, Zhang D, Zhang X. Experimental evaluation of MoS2
nanoparticles in jet MQL grinding with different types of vegetable oil as base oil.
J Clean Prod 2015;87:930–40.
[23] Zhang Y, Li C, Jia D, Zhang D, Zhang X. Experimental evaluation of the lubrication
performance of MoS 2/CNT nanofluid for minimal quantity lubrication in Ni-based
alloy grinding. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2015;99:19–33.
[24] Wang Y, Li C, Zhang Y, Li B, Yang M, Zhang X, et al. Experimental evaluation of the
lubrication properties of the wheel/workpiece interface in MQL grinding with
different nanofluids. Tribol Int 2016;99:198–210.
[25] Chetan, Behera BC, Ghosh S, Rao PV. Wear behavior of PVD TiN coated carbide
inserts during machining of Nimonic 90 and Ti6Al4V superalloys under dry and
MQL conditions. Ceram Int 2016;42:14873–85.
[26] Banerjee N, Sharma A. Development of a friction model and its application in finite
element analysis of minimum quantity lubrication machining of Ti-6Al-4 V. J Mater
Process Technol 2016;238:181–94.
[27] Banerjee N, Sharma A. Identification of a friction model for minimum quantity
lubrication machining. J Clean Prod 2014;83:437–43.
[28] Vaz M, Owen DRJ, Kalhori V, Lundblad M, Lindgren L-E. Modelling and simulation
of machining processes. Arch Comput Methods Eng 2007;14:173–204.
[29] Zhang Y, Li C, Ji H, Yang X, Yang M, Jia D, et al. Analysis of grinding mechanics and
improved predictive force model based on material-removal and plastic-stacking
mechanisms. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2017;122:81–97.
[30] Yang M, Li C, Zhang Y, Jia D, Zhang X, Hou Y, et al. Maximum undeformed
equivalent chip thickness for ductile-brittle transition of zirconia ceramics under
different lubrication conditions. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2017;122:55–65.
[31] Li K-M, Liang SY. Modeling of cutting forces in near dry machining under tool wear
effect. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2007;47:1292–301.
[32] Ji X, Zhang X, Liang SY. A new approach to predict machining force and
temperature with minimum quantity lubrication. 2012. p. 69–76.
[33] Zorev NN. Inter-relationship between shear processes occurring along tool face and
shear plane in metal cutting. Int Res Prod Eng ASME 1963:42–9. New York.
[34] Oxley PLB. Calculating the shear angle in orthogonal metal cutting from
fundamental stress-strain-strain rate properties of the work material. College of
Aeronautics Department of Production and Industrial Administration; 1964.
[35] Adibi-Sedeh AH, Madhavan V. Effect of some modifications to Oxley's machining
theory and the applicability of different material models. Mach Sci Technol 2002;6:
379–95.
295
Tribology International 117 (2018) 283–295
[36] DeMange JJ, Prakash V, Pereira JM. Effects of material microstructure on blunt
projectile penetration of a nickel-based super alloy. Int J Impact Eng 2009;36:
1027–43.
[37] Jafarian F, Imaz Ciaran M, Umbrello D, Arrazola PJ, Filice L, Amirabadi H. Finite
element simulation of machining Inconel 718 alloy including microstructure
changes. Int J Mech Sci 2014;88:110–21.
[38] Roth RN, Oxley PLB. Slip-line field analysis for orthogonal machining based upon
experimental flow fields. J Mech Eng Sci 1972;14:85–97.
[39] Kato S, Yamaguchi K, Yamada M. Stress distribution at the interface between tool
and chip in machining. J Eng Ind 1972;94:683–9.
[40] Barrow G, Graham W, Kurimoto T, Leong YF. Determination of rake face stress
distribution in orthogonal machining. Int J Mach Tool Des Res 1982;22:75–85.
[41] Buryta D, Sowerby R, Yellowley I. Stress distributions on the rake face during
orthogonal machining. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 1994;34:721–39.
[42] Arsecularatne JA. On tool-chip interface stress distributions, ploughing force and
size effect in machining. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 1997;37:885–99.
[43] Filice L, Micari F, Rizzuti S, Umbrello D. A critical analysis on the friction modelling
in orthogonal machining. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2007;47:709–14.
[44] McClain B, Batzer SA, Maldonado GI. A numeric investigation of the rake face stress
distribution in orthogonal machining. J Mater Process Technol 2002;123:114–9.
[45] Maity KP, Das NS. A class of slipline field solutions for metal machining with
sticking–slipping zone including elastic contact. Mater Des 2007;28:2310–7.
[46] Astakhov VP, Outeiro JC. Modeling of the contact stress distribution at the tool-chip
interface. Mach Sci Technol 2005;9:85–99.
[47] Moufki A, Molinari A, Dudzinski D. Modelling of orthogonal cutting with a
temperature dependent friction law. J Mech Phys Solids 1998;46:2103–38.
[48] Childs T, Maekawa K, Obikawa T, Yamane Y. Metal machining. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann; 2000vii–viii.
[49] Ozlu E, Molinari A, Budak E. Two zone analytical contact model applied tO
orthogonal cutting. Mach Sci Technol 2010;14:323–43.
[50] Grzesik W, Zalisz Z, Nieslony P. Friction and wear testing of multilayer coatings on
carbide substrates for dry machining applications. Surf Coatings Technol 2002;155:
37–45.
[51] Hedenqvist P, Olsson M. Sliding wear testing of coated cutting tool materials. Tribol
Int 1991;24:143–50.
[52] Claudin C, Mondelin A, Rech J, Fromentin G. Effects of a straight oil on friction at
the tool–workmaterial interface in machining. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2010;50:
681–8.
[53] Courbon C, Pusavec F, Dumont F, Rech J, Kopac J. Tribological behaviour of
Ti6Al4V and Inconel718 under dry and cryogenic conditions—application to the
context of machining with carbide tools. Tribol Int 2013;66:72–82.
[54] Klinkova O, Rech J, Drapier S, Bergheau J-M. Characterization of friction properties
at the workmaterial/cutting tool interface during the machining of randomly
structured carbon fibers reinforced polymer with carbide tools under dry
conditions. Tribol Int 2011;44:2050–8.
[55] Ben Abdelali H, Claudin C, Rech J, Ben Salem W, Kapsa P, Dogui A. Experimental
characterization of friction coefficient at the tool–chip–workpiece interface during
dry cutting of AISI 1045. Wear 2012;286–287:108–15.
[56] Mondelin A, Claudin C, Rech J, Dumont F. Effects of lubrication mode on friction
and heat partition coefficients at the tool–work material interface in machining.
Tribol Trans 2011;54:247–55.
[57] Zemzemi F, Bensalem W, Rech J, Dogui A, Kapsa P. New tribometer designed for
the characterisation of the friction properties at the tool/chip/workpiece interfaces
in machining. Tribotest 2008;14:11–25.
[58] Cabanettes F, Rolland J, Dumont F, Rech J, Dimkovski Z. Influence of minimum
quantity lubrication on friction characterizing tool–aluminum alloy contact.
J Tribol 2016;138:021107–10.
[59] Faverjon P, Rech J, Leroy R. Influence of minimum quantity lubrication on friction
coefficient and work-material adhesion during machining of cast aluminum with
various cutting tool substrates made of polycrystalline diamond, high speed steel,
and carbides. J Tribol 2013;135:041602–8.
[60] Gray C, Khuri TAI, Cornell JA. Response surfaces: designs and analyses. NewYork,
USA: Marcel Dekker Inc.; 1996.
[61] Rao S, Sethi A, Das AK, Mandal N, Kiran P, Ghosh R, et al. Fiber laser cutting of
CFRP composites and process optimization through response surface methodology.
Mater Manuf Process 2017:1–10.
[62] Lorentzon J, J€arvstråt N, Josefson BL. Modelling chip formation of alloy 718.
J Mater Process Technol 2009;209:4645–53.
[63] Reed RC. The superalloys: fundamentals and applications. Cambridge university
press; 2008.
[64] Nakayama K, Arai M, Kanda T. Machining characteristics of hard materials. CIRP
Ann Manuf Technol 1988;37:89–92.
[65] Davies MA, Chou Y, Evans CJ. On chip morphology, tool wear and cutting
mechanics in finish hard turning. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 1996;45:77–82.
[66] Giovanola JH. Adiabatic shear banding under pure shear loading part ii:
fractographic and metallographic observations. Mech Mater 1988;7:73–87.
[67] Hua J, Shivpuri R. Prediction of chip morphology and segmentation during the
machining of titanium alloys. J Mater Process Technol 2004;150:124–33.
[68] Flom D, Komanduri R, Lee M. High-speed machining of metals. Annu Rev Mater Sci
1984;14:231–78.
[69] Iskandar Y, Tendolkar A, Attia MH, Hendrick P, Damir A, Diakodimitris C. Flow
visualization and characterization for optimized MQL machining of composites.
CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 2014;63:77–80.