Prediction of 3D chip formation in the facing cutting with lathe machine using FEM

Yudhi Prasetyo, Mohamad Tauviqirrahman, and Rusnaldy

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1725, 020059 (2016); doi: 10.1063/1.4945513

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4945513
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/proceeding/aipcp/1725?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing

Articles you may be interested in

Effect of cutting parameters on the chip formation in orthogonal cutting
AIP Conf. Proc. 1315, 1101 (2011); 10.1063/1.3552327

Chatter active control in a lathe machine using magnetostrictive actuator

AIP Conf. Proc. 1315, 1011 (2011); 10.1063/1.3552311

3D Face Visualization Using Grid Light

Comput. Sci. Eng. 10, 48 (2008); 10.1109/MCSE.2008.44

Prediction of Serrated Chip Formation in Metal Cutting Process by FEM

AIP Conf. Proc. 712, 141 (2004); 10.1063/1.1766514

Machining Rubber on a Lathe

Rev. Sci. Instrum. 14, 77 (1943); 10.1063/1.1770128

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions IP: 120.169.254.235 On: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:18:37
 Prediction of 3D Chip Formation in the Facing Cutting with
Lathe Machine Using FEM
Yudhi Prasetyo1.2, a), Mohamad Tauviqirrahman2,b) and Rusnaldy2,c)
1
Mechanical Engineering Department, SMK Negeri 7
Jl. Simpang Lima, Semarang 50241, Indonesia
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Diponegoro,
Jl. Prof. Soedharto, S.H., Tembalang, Semarang 50725, Indonesia
a)
Corresponding author: yudhiprasetyo37@yahoo.com
b)
mtauviq99@yahoo.com
c)
rusnaldy@yahoo.com

Abstract. This paper presents the prediction of the chip formation at the machining process using a lathe machine in a
more specific way focusing on facing cutting (face turning). The main purpose is to propose a new approach to predict
the chip formation with the variation of the cutting directions i.e., the backward and forward direction. In addition, the
interaction between stress analysis and chip formation on cutting process was also investigated. The simulations were
conducted using three dimensional (3D) finite element method based on ABAQUS software with aluminum and high
speed steel (HSS) as the workpiece and the tool materials, respectively. The simulation result showed that the chip
resulted using a backward direction depicts a better formation than that using a conventional (forward) direction.

INTRODUCTION
The conventional machining process is still known as the most common manufacturing process in the industry.
One of the processes it is with a lathe machine. Most of published studies concerning on cylindrical turning despite
there are some the other process cutting on a lathe i.e facing, threading, grooving, cutting off. Research on facing
cutting (face turning) in experimental has done with by some researchers to investigate the performance of lathe
machining process [1-5]. It starts from mild and alloyed steel material [1] then growing very fast on machining
metal alloys [2] and most recently using of manufacture part material such Metal Matrix Composites [3-4] and
Powder Metallurgy steels [5]
The Johnson–Cook plasticity model is used to simulate the cutting process in lathe machining. Many researchers
have been simulated Orthogonal cutting with the use FEM simulation by using the Johnson–Cook plasticity model.
Most of them were investigated tool wear, cutting force, temperature, heat transfer, deformation tool or workpiece
material, chatter vibration during cutting process in lathe machining [1-8]. The HSS tool material was simulated
where the model used in [6] for analysis bending occurring on material C1060 cutting process under constant
conditions. The most of them using FEM 2D to simulate cutting process, 2D ABAQUS/explicit and FEM code
Deform-2D being employed [7-14]. FEM simulation of cutting processes has been changed to be an analysis
effective method for minimizing the use of experimental work.
This paper presents study in an innovative approach to predict chip formation in facing cutting. Cutting process
on face turning consist of two feeding direction methods, its conducted finite element based simulation. The
simulation using the Abaqus/Explicit software a three-dimensional model of the orthogonal cutting process
was built. The workpiece material properties on simulation have been modeled using the Johnson–Cook plasticity
model. It simulates chip formation in the case of aluminum machining and with high a speed steel (HSS) tool.

The 3rd International Conference on Advanced Materials Science and Technology (ICAMST 2015)
AIP Conf. Proc. 1725, 020059-1–020059-6; doi: 10.1063/1.4945513
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1372-6/$30.00

020059-1
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions IP: 120.169.254.235 On: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:18:37
 FUNDAMENTAL OF METAL CUTTING PROCESS
A metal cutting process is described as a force that works against the workpiece. This condition may cause the
occurrence of elastic and plastic deformation that involves several parameters, such as chip formation, friction and
heat, chatter and cutting tool wear. Relative motion during the cutting process between tool and workpiece induces a
shear deformation. This physical phenomenon resulting the workpiece deformed elastically, and plastic deformation
will occurrence, when the yield strength (workpiece material) is exceeded. The chip that formed passes over the rake
face of cutting tool leaves the surface of the workpiece. In this condition, the workpiece properties and cutting
condition are considerably influential against the chip formed.

An orthogonal cutting configuration is considered to be ideal to simulate the chip formation in cutting process,
specifically in facing cutting. It was first introduced as a cutting lathe modeling with the revolution of a round work
piece which rotates around a similar axis [7]. This approach is similar to [8] that describes cutting process in turning
operation as orthogonal cutting. [9] assuming that the modeled workpiece as the flat surface to machined the cutter
moves linearly. Face cutting is often called as facing cutting. It is described as machining process on lathe machine
by removing metal from the workpiece to produce a flat, smooth and very accurate surface that is perpendicular to
the axis of cylindrical parts. There are several methods of facing cutting on lathe operation. One of them is to feed
the workpiece from the circumferential surface to the center of it (forward direction) as shown in figure 1a, or from
the center to the circumferential surface by turning the workpiece (the lathe machine) clockwise [10]. This method
can be applied also for workpiece with counter clockwise revolution where the tool is fed from the circumferential
surface to the center of the workpiece (backward direction) as shown in Figure 1b.

(a) (b)
FIGURE 1. Facing Cutting process method : (a) conventional (forward) direction, (b) backward direction

MATERIAL MODELING
The workpiece was modeled as an aluminum material. A High Speed Steel material was used as the cutting tool.
The HSS tool is illustrated as a relatively rigid body with back UDNHDQJOHȖ ȡ  ஈDQGVLGHUDNHDQJOHȖ f  ஈDV
shown in figure 2.

020059-2
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions IP: 120.169.254.235 On: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:18:37
 (QGFXWWLQJHGJHஈ- ஈ

%DFNUDNHஈ- ஈ

6LGHUDNHஈ- ஈ

6LGHFOHDUDQFHஈ- ஈ )URQWFOHDUDQFHஈ- ஈ

FIGURE 2. Tool geometry used in the simulation

In this study, Aluminum type 2024 was modeled with the Johnson–Cook plasticity model [16], that was
developed by Johnson and Cook. The constitutive law is given by :

ߝ௣
ߪ = [‫ ܣ‬+ ‫ ߝ(ܤ‬௣ )௡ ] ൤1 + ‫ ݈݊ ܥ‬൬ ൰൨ [1 െ (ܶ ‫) כ‬௠ ]
ߝ௢

Where A, B, C, m, n are Johnson-Cook's material constants. Parameters of plasticity model are presented in
Table 1. Where A is the yield stress, B is the strain factor, C is the strain rate factor, n is the strain exponent, m is the
temperature exponent, ߝ௢ is the referential strain rate, ߝ ௣ is the effective plastic strain, and T is the effective
R

temperature.

TABEL 1. Johnson-Cook plasticity model parameters.

A [Mpa] B [Mpa] C n m
265 426 0.01 0.34 1.00

The damage modeling was also implemented on the simulation by using ABAQUS software/ an explicit
software to model the damage of the workpiece by using Johnson and Cook's modeling.

ߝ௙௔௜௟௨௥௘ ୀ[஽భ ା஽మ ௘௫௣(஽య ఙ‫)כ‬ |ଵା஽ర ௟௡(ఌ ‫|) כ‬ଵା஽ఱ ் ‫] כ‬

The damage parameters used are given in the following table 2 [17]. Where D1–D5 are material failure
parameters.

020059-3
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions IP: 120.169.254.235 On: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:18:37
 TABLE 2. The Johnson-Cook damage model parameters.

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5
0.11 0.12 1.5 0.01 0

MODELING SOLUTION
Finite Element Method is an effective numerical technique for partial differential equations (PDEs) in
engineering. Nowadays, the fact that engineers can obtain more detailed information for structural, thermal,
electromagnetic problems with virtual experiments. Finite element method is often used for predicting cutting
process on machining through simulation process. FEM can analyze the cutting process in detail, saving time and
money by reducing the number of processes required. An existing cutting process has developed, or being improved,
can be analyzed performance for reduce production cost. This effort in investigating cutting performance, to find a
new more efficient cutting process for applied in the manufacturing process. The method can reduce process testing,
but cannot totally replace experimental test process.
The commercial software Abaqus 6.10-1with its explicit was employed to prediction of 3D chip formation in
lathe machining process. The workpiece is modeled in length is 0.02 mm, height is 0.004 mm and its width is
0.001mm. The simulated model run at 150 m/min with 0.005 mm depth of cut. To optimize the contact management
during cutting simulation, a multi-part workpiece model was developed into two geometrical parts: (1) damage zone
workpiece and (2) the workpiece support.
It should be also mentioned in the simulation that the elements in the damage zone workpiece will be removed
when they are completely damaged, while the parts which are not completely damaged will become part of the chip
during its formation. The contact condition between the tool and the workpiece is assumed frictionless. For
boundary conditions used in the present model, the work piece was assumed to be fixed on its bottom and right
sides, and the cutting tool was allowed to move vertically from the bottom to the top while restrained horizontally

RESULTS
Main results compared in this study are the chip formation between two cutting direction methods in the process
of facing cutting. The cutting process parameters are assumed to be the same on both cutting process simulations.
Figure 3 shows the deformed mesh on the chip simulation to compare between two cutting direction methods. The
simulated model run at 150 m/min after the machining process was conducted by distance of 0.02 mm and 0.005
mm depth of cut. On the other hand, chip formation on backward direction method is more continuous than the
forward direction method. Von Misses stress on chip formation with backward direction method is greater than the
forward direction method. On the figure 3 shows deformed mesh for workpiece, when successful separation of the
workpiece material flow up the rake face of the tool during cutting simulation [18].

020059-4
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions IP: 120.169.254.235 On: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:18:37
 Figure 3. Progression chips formation and Von misses stress contour :
(a) Forward Direction, (b) Backward Direction

The results presented in Figure 4 show the comparison between two cutting direction methods while the
simulated reaction force configuration is under the same cutting conditions. Reaction forces on backward direction
method are greater than the forward direction method. This condition is caused by the difference in the direction of
cutting, so resulting differences in cutting force. Due to the more maximum in cutting force than the forward
direction methods. This indicates that the tendency to formed chips is more continuous at the back direction
methods. This is probable mainly due to the difference in the shear band [14].

Figure 4. Progression chips formation and Reaction Forces contour :

(a) Forward Direction, (b) Backward Direction

DISCUSSION
This study focused on the simulation to predict chip formation on facing cutting. There are many factors that
influence the chip formation. One of the crucial factors is the difference of cutting direction. The effect of rake angle
on facing cutting has been regarded as one significant aspect that influences the chip formation. This study
compared two methods of cutting direction. There were two rake angles used in this study, the back rake angle and

020059-5
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions IP: 120.169.254.235 On: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:18:37
 the side rake angle which helped to guide the chip flow during the cutting process. The cutting parameter to the
forward direction method related to back rake angle, while the backward direction method related to the side rake
angle. In future, the researcher conducts a study on the parameters of cutting process with the same simulation
techniques. This is conducted to find out the effect of cutting direction against the tool wear.

CONCLUSION
The simulation study using 3D FEM method to simulate the turning of aluminum has been developed using
ABAQUS/ explicit software. It was proven to able to predict chip formation. The main conclusion of this study is
that the cutting direction affects the chip formation. The aim of this study was to predict chip formation by involving
two different cutting direction methods. In the end, it was proven that facing cutting with the backward direction
method was better than forward direction method to form a chip. For reasons of simplicity in study, friction and heat
conduction into the cutting tool have been neglected in this simulation

REFERENCES
1. V. Šolaja, V, Wear 1, 512-514(1958).
2. D. Théo, G. Fromentin, and J.P. Costes, Procedia CIRP 31, 185-190(2015).
3. C.R.P. Rao, , M.S. Bhagyashekar, and N. Viswanath, Procedia Eng. 97, 930-940(2014).
4. Pedersen, W and M. Ramulu, “Facing SiCp/Mg metal matrix composites with carbide tools”, Journal of
materials processing technology 172, no. 3, 2006, 417-423.
5. Š. Andrej, K. Vasilko, M. Selecká, and H. Danninger, J. Mater. Process. Technol 176, 62-69 (2006).
6. D. Abdullah, and M. Nalbant, Mater. Design 26, 549-554 (2005).
7. M . Mahnama, and M. R. Movahhedy, J. Manuf. Process. 14, 188-194(2012).
8. M. Guediche, T. Mabrouki, C. Donnet, J.M. Bergheau, H. Hamdi, Procedia CIRP 31, 299-303(2015).
9. F. Salvatore, , S. Saad, H. Hamdi, Procedia CIRP 8, 305-310(2013).
10. T. Moriwaki, A. Horiuchi, and K. Okuda, Cirp. Ann-Manuf. Techn. 39, 81–84(1990).
11. Xie, L-J, J. Schmidt, C. Schmidt, and F. Biesinger, Wear 258, , 1479-1490(2005).
12. M. Guediche, T. Mabrouki, C. Donnet, J.M. Bergheau, H. Hamdi, Procedia CIRP 31, 299-303(2015).
13. M. Agmell, A. Ahadi, J-E. Ståhl, Procedia CIRP 8, 224-229(2013).
14. B. Martin, J. Rösler, and C. Siemers, Comput. Struct. 80, 495-513(2002).
15. Y.B. Guo, D.W. Yen, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 155, 1350-1356(2004).
16. G.R. Johnson, and W. H. Cook, “A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain
rates and high temperatures”, Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Ballistics 21, 1983.PP.541-
547
17. Kay, Gregory, “Failure modeling of titanium 6AI-4V and aluminum 2024-T3 with the Johnson-Cook material
model”, Office of Aviation Research, Federal Aviation Administration, 2003.
18. S.L. Soo, D.K. Aspinwall, R.C. Dewes, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 150, 116–123(2004).

020059-6
Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions IP: 120.169.254.235 On: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:18:37