EVALUATION OF CUTTING FORCE FOR
ORTHOGONAL CUTTING USING EXPERIMENTAL
TECHNIQUE
By
JAYESHBHAI C. PATEL
(Enrollment No: - 130030728011)
Guided by
Mr. JAYENDRA B. KANANI
Assistant professor
M.Tech (General Mechanical)
A Thesis is submitted to
Gujarat Technological University in Partial
Fulfilment of the Requirements for
The Post Graduate Degree of Master of Engineering in
Mechanical Engineering (Production)
MAY 2015
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
ATMIYA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE
RAJKOT
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that research work embodied in this thesis entitled “Evaluation of
Cutting Force for Orthogonal Cutting Using Experimental Technique” was
carried out by Mr. Jayeshbhai C. Patel (Enrollment No: 130030728011) at Atmiya
Institute of Technology and Science (003), Rajkot, Gujarat For partial fulfillment
of Master of Engineering degree in Mechanical Engineering to be awarded by Gujarat
Technological University. This Research work has been carried out under my
supervision and is to the satisfaction of department.
Date:Place:-
Signature and Name of Supervisor
Signature and Name of H.O.D
Asst. Prof. Jayendra B. Kanani
Prof. P. S. Puranik
Signature and Name of Principal
Dr. G.D.Acharya
Seal of Institute
i
COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that research work embodied in this thesis entitled “Evaluation of
Cutting Force for Orthogonal Cutting Using Experimental Technique” was
carried out by Mr. Jayeshbhai C. Patel (Enrollment No: 130030728011) at Atmiya
Institute of Technology and Science, Rajkot, Gujarat (Institute code: 003) For
partial fulfillment of Master of Engineering degree in Mechanical Engineering to be
awarded by Gujarat Technological University. He has complied with the comments
given by the Dissertation phase-1 as well as Mid Semester Thesis Reviewer to my
satisfaction.
Date:Place:-
Signature and Name of Student
Signature and Name of Guide
Mr. Jayeshbhai C. Patel
Asst. Prof. Jayendra B. Kanani
ii
PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that research work embodied in this thesis entitled “Evaluation of
Cutting Force For Orthogonal Cutting Using Experimental Technique” carried
out by Mr. Jayeshbhai C. Patel (Enrollment No. 130030728011) at Atmiya Institute
of technology and science (003) for partial fulfillments of Master of Engineering
degree to be awarded by Gujarat Technological University, has published/accepted
article entitled “Evaluation of cutting force for orthogonal cutting using
experimental technique” for publication by International Journal of Advance
Engineering and Research Development in Volume 2, Issue 5 during May-2015.
Date:
Place:
Signature and Name of Student
Signature and Name of Guide
Mr. Jayeshbhai C. Patel
Asst. Prof. Jayendra B. Kanani
Signature and Name of Principal
Dr. G.D.Acharya
Seal of Institute
iii
THESIS APPROVAL CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that research work embodied in this thesis entitled “Evaluation of
Cutting Force for Orthogonal Cutting Using Experimental Technique” was
carried out by Mr. Jayeshbhai C. Patel (Enrollment No: 130030728011) at Atmiya
Institute of Technology and Science, Rajkot, Gujarat (Institute Code: 003) is
approved for award of the degree of Master of Engineering in Mechanical
Engineering by Gujarat Technological University (GTU).
Date:Place:-
Examiners Sign and Name:
……………………………
(
……………………….…..
)
(
iv
)
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
We hereby certify that we are the sole author of this thesis and that neither any part of
this thesis nor the whole of the thesis has been submitted for a degree to any other
University or Institution.
We certify that, to the best of our knowledge, our thesis neither infringes upon anyone
neither’s copyright nor violate any proprietary rights, any ideas, techniques,
quotations, or any other material from the work of other people is included in my
thesis, published or otherwise, are fully acknowledged in accordance with the
standard referencing practices. Furthermore, to the extent that I have included
copyrighted material that surpasses the bounds of fair dealing within the meaning of
the Indian Copyright Act, We certify that we have obtained a written permission from
the copyright owner(s) to include such material(s) in our thesis and have included
copies of such copyright clearances to my appendix.
We declare that this is a true copy of my thesis, including any final revisions, as
approved by my thesis review committee.
Date:
Place:
Signature of Student: -
Signature of Guide:-
Name of Student: Jayeshbhai C. Patel
Name of Guide: Mr. J. B. Kanani
Enrollment No: 130030728011
Institute Code: 003
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research work would not have been possible without the kind support of many
people. I take this opportunity to acknowledge that who has been great sense of
support and inspiration thought the research work successful. There are lots of people
who inspired me and helped, worked for me in every possible way to provide the
details about various related topics thus making research and report work success.
My first gratitude goes to our Head of the Mechanical Department Prof. P. S.
Puranik, for his guidance, encouragement and support during my semester. Despite
his busy schedule, he is always available to give me advice, support and guidance
during the entire period of my semester. His insight and creative ideas are always the
inspiration for me during the research.
I am very grateful to Mr. J.B.Kanani for all their diligence, guidance, encouragement
and help throughout the period of research, which have enabled me to complete the
research work in time. Their constant inspiration and encouragement along with their
valuable guidance has been instrumental in the successful completion of this project.
They are always been willingly present whenever I needed the slightest support from
them. I also thank him for the time that they spared for me, from their extreme busy
schedule. Also I am very much thankful to Sheetal Pandya for her technical
expertise.
I am very grateful to Mr. Milan Patel owner of devson enterprise for provide a good
plat form in his industry for doing this kind of research work and allowed to use his
industrial resource to perform the dissertation work.
Last, but not the least my special thanks go to our institute, Atmiya Institute of
Technology and Science, for giving me this opportunity to work in the great
environment.
Jayeshbhai C. Patel
(130030728011)
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title
Certificate
i
Compliance Certificate
ii
Paper Publication Certificate
iii
Thesis Approval Certificate
iv
Declaration of Originality
v
Acknowledgement
vi
Table of Contents
vii
List of Figures
ix
List of Table
x
List of Nomenclatures
xi
Abstract
xii
Chapter 1
Introduction
1-13
1.1
Machining process
1
1.2
Turning process
2
1.3
Influencing factors
3
1.3.1 Energy in the cutting process
3
1.3.2 Machinability of metal
3
1.3.3 Affecting factors on the machinability
3
1.3.4 The variables of tool affecting the machinability
3
1.3.5 The variables machine affecting the machinability
4
1.3.6 Machinability evaluation terms
4
1.4
Advantage of high machinability
4
1.5
The tool wear is generally classified as follows
4
1.6
Difference between orthogonal cutting and oblique cutting
5
1.7
Forces acting on a cutting tool
6
1.8
Chip and its different types
6
1.8.1 The below listed factors favors the formation of continuous
7
chip
1.8.2 The favorable factors for discontinuous chip formation
vii
7
1.8.3 The favorable factors for continuous chip with built up edge
1.9
Different shear angle model shear angle models
Chapter 2
Problem Definition
8
9
10-11
2.1
Description of problem
10
2.2
Objective
11
2.3
Benefits
11
Chapter 3
Literature Review
12-17
Chapter 4
Cutting Force Analytical models
18-21
4.1
Model 1: Ernst and Merchant
18
4.2
Model 2: Lee and Schaffer
19
4.3
Model 3 of Dautzenberg C.S. theories
20
Chapter 5
Experimental setup
22-30
5.1 Design of experiment by using Minitab
22
5.1.1
Factors and levels
22
5.1.2
Design of Experiments
23
5.2 Experimental Procedure
25
5.3 Information about work piece material AISI304
26
5.4 Information about tool material inserts TMM08
28
5.5 Tensile test report
28
5.6 Experimental setup for straight turning of AISI304
30
Chapter 6
6.1
6.2
Analytical calculation
31-34
Analytical Procedure to find out forces by merchant theories
Analytical procedure to find out forces by Lee-Schaffer:
6.3
Analytical procedure to find out forces by Dautzenberg c.s.
Chapter 7
Result and Conclusion
Future Scope
31
32
33
35-41
42
References
43-44
Appendix A
Paper publication certificate
45
Appendix B
Review card
Appendix C
Compliance report
52
Appendix D
Plagiarism report
53-55
46-51
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
No.
Figure Name
Page No.
1.1
Operation related to turning
2
1.2
Difference between orthogonal and oblique cutting
5
1.3
Forces acting on cutting tool
6
1.4
Continuous chip
7
1.5
Dis-continuous chip
7
1.6
Continuous chip with built up edge
8
4.1
Geometry of merchant circle diagram
18
4.2
Lee and Shaffer’s slip line field model
19
5.1
Full factorial design-a
23
5.2
Full factorial design-b
23
5.3
Full factorial factors and levels design
24
5.4
Standard run order for DOE
24
5.5
Schematic drawing of orthogonal machining of tube material
26
5.6
Work piece material AISI304
26
5.7
Work piece material testing report
27
5.8
Cutting tool with 6 degree rack
28
5.9
Tensile test report
29
5.10 Experimental Setup for turning AISI304
30
7.1
Shear angle ϕ Vs thrust force Ft* at 0.25, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 , 0.5 feed
39
7.2
Shear angle ϕ Vs feed force Fv* for 0.25, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.5 feed
40
ix
List of Table
No.
Table Name
th
Page No.
th
19 and 20 century internal force angel used in orthogonal
1.1
cutting
9
5.1
Factors and Levels
22
7.1
Result analytically calculated by Ernst and Merchant circle
35
7.2
Results analytically calculated by Lee and Schaffer
36
7.3
Results analytically calculated by Dautzenberg C.S. model
37
7.4
Experimentally measured value of cutting forces
38
x
List of Nomenclature
b= width to the cut
h= uncut chip thickness
hc= cut chip thickness
Fv= feed force
Ft= thrust force
FF= Frictional force ate tool rack face
V= cutting speed
N= spindle speed
ϕ = shear angle
β= friction angle
α= rack angle
f= feed
= shear flow stress
̄ = equivalent stress
C= specific stress
n= strain hardening exponent
ƐAB= equivalent strain at shear plan
Fw = frictional force on the tool on the contact zone
σ = flow stress
xi
Evaluation of Cutting Force for Orthogonal Cutting Using
Experimental Technique
Submitted By
Patel Jayeshbhai C
Supervised By
Jayendra B. Kanani
Assistant professor
M.Tech (General Mechanical)
ABSTRACT
Metal cutting is one of the most widely used manufacturing processes in an industry
and there is great deal of studies to investigate the metal cutting process in both
academic and industrial work. The objective of analyzing the metal cutting process is
to improve productivity. Prediction of important process parameter using
experimental investigation such as forces, stress distribution, temperature, etc. plays
significant role for designing tool geometry and optimizing cutting conditions to
improve productivity. We cannot find out the forces with analytical model exactly to
experimentally measured cutting forces, and there are lot more theories are presented
by scientist too predict cutting force. But for particular material which theories give
batter result of prediction is challenging task. Here our aim of these researches is to
choose the analytical model which will give best result of predicted cutting force for
AISI304 material.By using 1) Ernst and merchant. 2) Lee and Schaffer and 3)
Dautzenberg C.S model forces are theoretically calculated and comparing with each
with experimental data. Experiments are carried out for different cutting condition.
Also reason for this is found out and behavior of shear angle with respect forces and
cutting condition is evaluated.
xiii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Machining process like turning, milling, boring and drilling are among the
most important process for distinct part manufacturing. Scientist has been studying
machining processes for more than a century to gain better understanding and develop
further advanced manufacturing technology [14].
The study of turning has continued from more than a century, but it still
interests a great amount of research effort. This is on the grounds that turning is not
just most often utilized machining operation as a part of the cutting edge fabricating
industry, additionally in light of the fact that it is ordinary single-point machining
operation. Other machining operations such as milling, drilling and boring are
multiple-point machining operation that can be investigated based on the
combinations of single-point machining operation [19]. Thus, in this way, the
investigation of turning can contribute significantly to the information of metal
cutting standards and machining practice
1.1 Machining Process
Machining is the broad term used to describe removal of material from a
workpiece; it covers some processes, which we usually categorized into the following
categories:
a)
Metal cutting, normally concerning single-point or multi point cutting tools,
each with a clearly defined geometry.
b)
Processes using abrasive practical, like grinding.
c)
Non-traditional machining processes, which use electrical, chemical, and
optimal sources of energy.
It is important to study machining, in addition to all manufacturing operations,
as a system consisting of the tool, the workpiece and the machine. The traditional
machining includes turning, milling, drilling, and grinding [19]. It correspondingly
includes computer applications which are being supported by the machine tool. The
non-traditional machining includes primers on the topics like Electro chemical
machining, Electric discharge machining, and ultra-sonic machining.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 1
INTRODUCTION
1.2 Turning Process
Turning is the procedure in which a single point cutting tool is utilized by
giving parallel feed motion relative to the surface going to be machine. It can be done
manually, numerically controlled or computer numerical control in a traditional form.
This type of machine tool is called as having computer numerical control, better
known as CNC, and is generally utilized with numerous different sorts of machine
apparatus other than the machine.
When turning, a workpiece of material like wood, metal, plastic also stone, is
rotated and a cutting tool is traversed along two axes of motion to produce precise
diameters and depths. Turning can be either on the outside of the workpiece (called as
external turning) or inside of the component to produce tubular components (called as
internal turning) to various geometries. Though now fairly rare, early lathes could
even be used to produce complex geometric figures; although unless the introduction
of computer numerical control it had become unfamiliar to use one for this purpose
for the last three quarters of the twentieth century. It is said that the lathe is the only
machine tool that can reproduce itself.
The turning procedures are normally carried out on a lathe machine,
considered to be the oldest machine tools, and categorized in four different types as
straight turning, taper turning, profiling g or external grooving. These types of turning
processes can produce various shapes of materials such as straight, conical, curved, or
grooved workpiece. In general, turning uses simple single-point cutting tools. Each
group of workpiece materials has an optimum set of tools angles which have been
developed through the years. The bits of waste metal from turning operations are
known
as
chips.
Figure 1.1 Lathe Operation [18]
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 2
INTRODUCTION
1.3 Influencing Factors
1.3.1 Energy in the cutting process
Total energy per unit volume is estimated to the summation of following four
energies.
a) Shear energy per unit volume in shear plane.
b) Friction energy per unit volume in tool face.
c) Surface energy per unit volume because of the formation of a new surface area
in cutting.
d) Momentum (Energy per unit volume) because of the variation in momentum
linked with the metal as it crosses the shear plane.
1.3.2 Machinability of metal
Machinability can be defined as the ease with which a material can be
satisfactorily machined.
1.3.3 Affecting factors on the machinability
a) Chemical composition of work material.
b) Microstructure of work material.
c) Mechanical properties like ductility, toughness etc.
d) Physical properties of work materials.
e) Method of production of the work piece materials.
1.3.4 The variables of tool affecting the machinability
a) Tool geometry and tool material.
b) Nature of engagement of toll with the work.
c) Rigidity of tool.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 3
INTRODUCTION
1.3.5 The variables machine affecting the machinability
a) Rigidity of machine.
b) Power and accuracy of the machine tool.
1.3.6 Machinability evaluation terms
The following criteria are suggested for evaluating machinability:
a) Tool life per grind.
b) Rate of removal per tool grind.
c) Magnitude of cutting forces and power consumption.
d) Surface Roughness.
e) Dimensional stability of finished work material..
f) Heat generated in cutting.
g) Ease of chip disposal.
h) Chip shape, size and hardness.
1.4 Advantage of high machinability
a) Good surface finish can be generated.
b) High cutting speed can be used.
c) Less power consumption.
d) Metal removal rate is high.
e) Less tool wear.
1.5 The tool wear is generally classified as follows.
a) Flank Wear or Crater Wear.
b) Face Wear
c) Nose Wear
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 4
INTRODUCTION
1.6 Difference between orthogonal cutting and oblique cutting
Table1.1: Comparison of orthogonal and oblique cutting
Sr.
Orthogonal Cutting
no
1
2
3
Oblique Cutting
The Cutting edge of the tool is
The cutting edge is inclined at an
perpendicular to the cutting velocity
acute angle with the normal to the
vector.
cutting velocity vector.
The chip flows over the tool face and
The chip flows on the tool face
the direction of chip-flow velocity is
making an angle with the normal
normal to the cutting edge.
on the cutting edge.
The cutting edge clears the width of the
The cutting edge may or may not
work piece on either ends (i.e. No side
clear the width of the work piece.
flows)
4
The maximum chip thickness occurs at
The maximum chip thickness may
its middle
not occur at the middle
Figure 1.2 Difference between orthogonal and oblique cutting [19]
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 5
INTRODUCTION
1.7 Forces acting on a cutting tool
[20]
Velocity of
Tool relative to
workpiece V
WORKPIECE
FC Tangential 'Cutting' Force (67%)
DIRECTION OF ROTATION
Fr Radial
Force (6%)
Longitudinal F t
'Thrust' Force (27%)
CUTTING TOOL
DIRECTION OF FEED
Figure 1.3 Forces acting on cutting tool [20]
1.8 Chip and its different types
The machining is carried out shearing of material begins and that’s sheared
material starts to flow along the cutting tool face in the form of small pieces is called
chip. Chips are mainly classified into three types:
1) Continuous chip
2) Discontinuous chip
3) Continuous chip with built up edge.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 6
INTRODUCTION
1.8.1The below listed factors favors the formation of continuous chip.
Figure 1.4 Continuous chip[21]
a) Ductile work material.
b) Small amount of depth of cut
c) High amount of cutting speed
d) Large amount of rake angle.
e) Sharp cutting edge.
f) Cutting fluid in proper amount.
g) Low friction between chips and tool faces.
1.8.2. The favorable factors for discontinuous chip formation
Figure 1.5 Dis-continuous chip[21]
a) Brittle workpiece material.
b) Low rake angle
c) Higher depth of cut.
d) Less cutting speed.
e) More amount of cutting fluid.
f) Ductile workpiece material cutting with low cutting speed and small amount
rake angle of the tool.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 7
INTRODUCTION
1.8.3. The favorable factors for continuous chip with built up edge
Figure 1.6 continuous chip with built up edge[21]
a) Lesser cutting speed.
b) Minor rake angle.
c) Uneven feed.
d) Strong adhesion between chip and tool face.
e) Inadequate cutting fluid.
f) Large uncut thickness.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 8
INTRODUCTION
1.9 Different shear angle models
Several shear angle models have been developed to explain the behavior of
workpiece material during metal cutting process. These models are shown in
following table. Analytical approaches to quantify different process parameters were
begun during the early 1900s. [14]
Notably, Piispanen, Ernst and Merchant, and followed by Lee and Shaffer
were the pioneers in this field.
Table1.2: 19th and 20th century internal force angel used in orthogonal cutting.
Zvorkin,
1890
Ingenious
Text, 1896
Ernst
and
Merchant,
1941
Merchant,
1945
Stabler, 1951
Lee
and
Shaffer,
1951
Hucks, 1951
Hucks, 1951
Shaw, Cook,
Finnie, 1953
Black
and
Hung, 1951
́
Payton, 2002
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 9
CHAPTER 2
PROBLEM DEFINITION
After referring to number of research paper, found that there are number of analytical
models available to find out cutting forces in cutting process based on different
theories and with lots of assumptions. Because of these assumptions it is difficult to
find out the cutting forces with analytical model near to experimental cutting forces or
experimentally measured cutting forces. We can use any one of these model to
calculate cutting force. But, which one to choose is difficult task. Which Model will
give us result to real value of cutting force is question. And which analytical model is
good for which material is question. Which are the factors responsible for deviation of
force value by analytical model to experimental value has to be found. The main aim
of these dissertations will be to find out optimum analytical model for particular
material and behavior of shear angle.
2.1 Description of problem
In this dissertation work the Evaluate the forces produce during orthogonal turning
has to be done.
By Different models listed below
1) Dautzenberg C.S.
2) Lee and scheffer
3) Ernt and merchant
In which different force produced during orthogonal cutting is firstly calculated by
above listed three theoretical models for specified cutting condition three different
materials, then experiments are carried out for same cutting condition for same
materials. Among this which model will give optimum result near to practical is found
out. Also reason for variation between these three models is to found out.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 10
PROBLEM DEFINITION
2.2Objective
 Finding of the best model which can give optimum result near to practically
measured value for AISI304.
 To find reason behind the variation of the forces with reference to
experimental for different model.
 To evaluate the behavior of shear angle with respect to different cutting
condition of speed, feed and also with force Fv and Ft for AISI304.
2.3 Benefits
 Estimation of cutting power consumption, which also enables selection of the
power source(s) during design of the machine tools. (e.g. for special purpose
machine)
 More accurate Structural design of the machine – fixture – tool system.
 Evaluation of role of the various machining parameters (process – VC, So, t,
tool – material and geometry, environment – cutting fluid) on cutting forces.
 Study of behavior and machinability characterization of the work materials.
 Increase in tool life by optimizing process parameter for cutting condition by
predicting more accurate result of forces.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 11
CHAPTER 3
LITERATURE REVIEW
Metal cutting and forming process are traditional and most common manufacturing
processes from the so long decays. Machining process started from the 19th century
but Machining processes have been here for a long time and it is always area of
interest of researchers. Research has been done on several aspects of metal cutting
such as chip-formation, cutting mechanics, machined surface, tool wear-life etc.
3.1 H. Jordan, et al “Application of response surface methodology for
determining cutting force model in turning of LM6/SiCP metal
matrix composite” 2013 [1]
H. Jorden stated that experiments and investigation conclude the effect of cutting
speed, depth of cut and weight percentage of SiC in the metal matrix on cutting forces
(Ft, Fr, Fa) in straight turning of LM6 Al/SiC metal matrix composites. Following
conclusions are drawn Sequential approach in face central composite design is
beneficial as it saves number of experimentations required. This is observed in force
analysis. A functional relationship between the cutting forces and the cutting
parameters is established using the principles of response surface methodology.
Quadratic model is fitted for tangential force, radial force and axial force. The results
of ANOVA and the conducting confirmation experiment proved that mathematical
models of the cutting forces fit and predict values of the responses which are close to
those readings recorded experimentally with a 95% confident interval. The sensitivity
analysis is revealed that cutting speed is most significant factor influencing the
response variables investigated.
3.2 B. de Augustin, et al “Experimental Analysis of the Cutting
Forces Obtained in Dry Turning Processes of UNS A97075
Aluminum Alloys” 2013 [2]
B. de Agustine conclude that during the dry turning processes of an aluminium alloy
UNS A97075, the cutting component of the forces is more sensible to the variation
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 12
LITERATURE REVIEW
of the cutting conditions than the rest of components analysed in this study. The
influential factors on the cutting forces are, in order of importance, the feed rate, the
depth of cut, the type of tool, the interaction of feed rate and spindle speed, the
spindle speed and the interaction of type of tool and feed rate. Tools with nose radius
of 0.8 mm have, in general, better behaviour than ones with radius of 0.4 mm from the
point of view of the forces generated during the machining, being similar at the lower
feed rates employed in this study.The most influential factor on the of forces
generated during the turning is the spindle speed; the greater the spindle speed is the
more dispersion of the forces is obtained. Nevertheless, at low feed rates, this
tendency reduces significantly so it is possible to apply higher values of spindle speed
with no detriment on the aspect mentioned above.
3.3 Viktor P. et al “A Methodology for practical cutting force
evaluation based on the energy spent in the cutting system”2008 [3]
This paper proposes a methodology to evaluate the cutting force and the required
cutting power is. The proposed methodology uses the major parameters of the cutting
process and the chip compression ratio as the one of the most important process
output (in terms of process evaluation and optimization). The apparent simplicity of
the proposed methodology is based upon a great body of the theoretical and
experimental studies on the establishing the correlations among the parameters in
metal cutting. This simplicity allows the use of this methodology even on the shop
floor for practical evaluations and optimization of machining operations. The results
of calculations indicate that the power required for the deformation of the layer being
removed is the greatest in the metal cutting system within the practical cutting speed
limits. When cutting speed increases, the relative impact of this power decreases
while the powers spent at the tool-chip and tool-workpiece interfaces increase. At
high cutting speeds, the sum of the later powers may exceed that required for the
plastic deformation of the layer being removed. This result signifies the role of metal
cutting tribology at high cutting speed. The effects of cutting feed and the depth of cut
on the energy partition seem to be insignificant.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 13
LITERATURE REVIEW
Although an increasing attention is played to the role of the so-called cohesive energy
in metal cutting, the obtained results show that, when accounted for properly, the
relative impact of this factor is insignificant. This can be readily explained by very
small area of fracture in metal cutting
3.4 W.S. Lin, et al “Modelling the surface roughness and cutting
force for turning” 1999 [4]
W.S. Lin elaborated that a projected ideal, grounded adductive interacting, to assess
surface roughness and accurate machining force which is verified by providing
regression analysis for adductive network. Critical variable which is impacting on
roughness is feed rate. By increasing feed rate more roughness value was found, while
regression multiplier for surface roughness gives that machining speed having major
effect on surface roughness. Varying parameters which control the force are feed rate
and depth of cut, where the cutting force tends to increase with an increased feed rate
and depth of cut. Change in feed rate having effect on surface roughness and the
cutting force, during process planning evaluation, measures should be taken to
increase speed and depth of cut, until the minimum feed rate value to secure an
optimal surface roughness value and optimal metal-removal rate.
3.5 A. Shams, et al “Improvement of orthogonal cutting simulation
with a nonlocal damage model” 2012 [5]
A Shams presented non-local damage model which is developed to analyse the
orthogonal cutting process very precisely to reduce disadvantages of material
characteristics in simulation of cutting process. Precision of material model is
invented by validating with the J–C model and nonlocal damage model. The nonlocal
damage model performed was performed by the author has been validated by
comparison. Correct failure in cutting process had for accuracy measurement.
Simulation results indicating that the nonlocal damage having more stable in the
transient stage of the cutting process.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 14
LITERATURE REVIEW
3.6 A. Molinari, et al “The Merchant’s model of orthogonal cutting
revisited: A new insight into the modeling of chip formation”2007[6]
Author has presented (Modified -Merchant shear angle), Institute that α mm is
different from shear angle α mm one of additive term y/2. It is main α mm was the
output of Merchant model for minimum cutting energy. Theoretical and practical
values were not matched for shape angle. So it shows the scope to identify the
dimness in theory model of merchant and to improve it/. As a pedagogical model, the
Merchant’s approach having major importance which used in every literature will
provide a simple modelling for orthogonal machining process. From the presented
research, some words of careful in offering Merchant’s model. The proposed
improvement of the Merchant’s model does not discredit the criterion of minimum of
the cutting energy. Simply one has to supplement this benchmark by a stability
condition for the chip morphology.
3.7 W.B. Lee, et. al “Effect of material anisotropy on shear angle
prediction in metal cutting—a mesoplasticity approach”2003 [7]
A meso-plasticity model has been changed to predict the result on characteristics
property shear angle in diamond cutting of crystalline OFHC copper primarily based
on input of crystallographic texture knowledge. The foremost doubtless shear angle is
that the one at that the effective Taylor issue is found minimum. There’s a decent
agreement between the expected shear angle and therefore the revealed experimental
knowledge obtained from the ultra-precision diamond turning of an OFHC copper
using a zero rake tool. The one crystal model is with success extended during this
paper to hide crystalline work material supported data of its crystallization orientation
distribution of the work material. Additional work is needed to increase the simplified
model to incorporate the result of alternative cutting variables on the shear angle
formation.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 15
LITERATURE REVIEW
3.8 Zhongtao Fu, et al “Analytical modelling of chatter vibration in
orthogonal cutting using a predictive force model” 2014 [8]
In this paper, a new analytical model of chatter stability is proposed in which the
dynamic cutting forces are derived from a predictive force model in orthogonal
cutting. The results indicate that the proposed model is in good agreement with the
existing semi-analytical model, the existing chatter model and experimental results
available in literatures. The main conclusions can be summarized as follows: (1) The
proposed model is developed using a predictive force model which considers the
thermo-mechanical behaviour of material property, tool geometry and cutting
conditions during cutting processes. Moreover, the model is easy to implement and
can give much more insight About on the effects of cutting parameters on chatter
stability (2)The dynamic cutting force coefficients can be identified by the thermomechanical properties of cutting process over a given wide range of cutting
parameters without restoring to the empirical or experimental approach. What is more
significant, it has been shown to introduce the process damping, and in turn increase
the chatter stability especially at lower cutting velocities. (3) It is easily found out
from these model validations, that the proposed model is widely applicable to the
analysis of chatter stability in the different cutting process and provides an efficient
method to control chatter vibration, and even to predict surface accuracy in metal
cutting. However, the model of plough force due to the interference between the
cutting tool and the workpiece and the influence of process damping caused by this
phenomenon to chatter stability need further research in future work.
3.9 A. Pramanik et al “Prediction of cutting forces in machining of
metal matrix composites” 2006 [9]
In this work, a mechanics model was developed for predicting the forces once
machining metallic element alloy based mostly MMCs bolstered with ceramic
particles. The resultant cutting force was thought-about to include parts attributable to
chip formation, tilling and, particle fracture and displacement, and therefore the
calculations of those force parts were supported Merchant’s shear plane analysis, slip
line theory and movie maker theory, severally. The predictions disclosed that, the
force attributable to chip formation is far more than those attributable to tilling and
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 16
LITERATURE REVIEW
particle fracture. A comparison between expected and experimental force results
showed glorious agreement.
3.10 M. Cotterell et al “Temperature and strain measurement during
chip formation in orthogonal cutting conditions applied to Ti-6Al4V” 2013 [10]
The comparison between classical theory and video analysis technique show a similar
pattern. The video analysis offers a good technique to measure strain. The results of
the IR experiments conducted for different cutting velocities and feed rates show a
good agreement with the thermal model. The thermal model based on Ernst-Merchant
and heat conduction equations and the video analysis technique are very useful to
predict temperature and shear strain. The methods can be used for further studies of
segmented chip formation during different cutting processes around shear plane area.
The model developed in this research provides parameters in a fastest, easiest and
cheapest way than previous methods such as microscope, thermocouples,
dynamometer, etc. The main contribution of the conjunction of mechanical models
and computational models is the increase of the analytical capacity of the classical
models to evaluate simultaneously temperature and strain. A complementary study
using FEM analysis is under experimentation. This software based analysis, allow us
to simulate different set of parameters, by validating the methodology using the
experimental test results presented in this contribution. The commercial software used
is AdvanteEdgeTM, which is a finite element modelling package especially for metal
cutting processes such as: turning, drilling, milling, etc., in both two and three
dimensions.
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 17
CHAPTER 4
CUTTING FORCE ANALYTICAL MODEL
4.1 Model 1: Ernst and Merchant.
Figure 4.1 Geometry of merchant circle diagram[14]
Ernst and merchant reasoned that the shear plan would take such position that the
shear stress acting upon it would be maximum[11]. Assuming the shear stress to be
uniformly distributed it holds:[15]
Whereas is the area of the shear plane. The optimum was found by differentiating this
expression with respect to
that
and
and equating the resultant to zero. Under the assumption
are independent of , this leads to:
This equation gives a simple relation between the shear angle
and the friction
angle . Combining this equation with the force relationship of the plane
representation in
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 18
CUTTING FORCE ANALYTICAL MODEL
The cutting forces can be calculated if
relation of fig4.1, the shear angle
and
are known. Using the geometrical
can be determined if the chip thickness is
measured experimentally.
4.2 Model 2: Lee and Schaffer
Figure 4.2 Lee and Shaffer’s slip line field model [14]
Lee and Shaffer applied the slip line theory to find the shear angle solution [12]. They
treated the workpiece as a rigid plastic solid without strain hardening or thermal
effect. As in the Ernst-Merchant model they assumed the shear plan AB to be a
direction of maximum stress where all deformation takes place. However, Lee and
Shaffer constructed a slip line field theory ABC in which material is in union state.
The equation of shear angle for Lee and Schaffer model [16],
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 19
CUTTING FORCE ANALYTICAL MODEL
4.3 Model 3 of Dautzenberg C.S. theories
Based on the upper bound theory Dautzenberg C.S. proposed a somewhat different
approach to obtain the shear plan angle they divided the total energy consumption
needed for the chip formation in two parts: energy needed for deformation in the shear
zone and energy dissipation due to friction at the rack face. Using that the energy
related to motion of feed is negligible to the energy related to the motion of cutting,
the power of consumption can be approximated as FVV[13]. Thus they found:
̄
∫
n his e a i n
4.1
is e i alen s ress in he shear
L d i ’s e a i n
ne hi h as s pp r ed
f ll
The total equivalent strain in the shear zone and the chip speed
Vc can easily be deducted from equation fig1.
4.2
4.3
Now the power balance can be written as:
̄
4.4
Finally, the optimum shear angle can be found by differentiating the right
hand side of equation4.4 to ϕ and setting the resulting equation to zero. This leads to
differential equation:
̄
]
[
4.5
To solve this differential equation numerically a bound condition for FF must be
known. Dautzenberg C.S. argued that in case the tool friction is zero the chip
thickness will remain the un-deformed chip thickness, so for the boundary condition it
holds:
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 20
CUTTING FORCE ANALYTICAL MODEL
(
)
Using this boundary condition eq.4.5 can be solved numerically to give FF for a
certain value of ϕ
FF=Ft cosα +Fv sinα
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 21
CHAPTER 5
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
5.1 Design of experiment by using Minitab.
5.1.1 Factors and levels
Factors and levels for the varying parameters in simulation are taken as:
Table5.1 Factors and Levels
Sr.no.
Factor-1
Factor-2
Spindle Speed
Feed
Leval-1
2387
0.25
Leval-2
1194
0.05
Leval-3
-
0.1
Leval-4
-
0.2
Leval-5
-
0.4
Leval-6
-
0.5
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 22
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
5.1.2 Design of Experiments
To design the Runs for Full factorial design of experiment by using Minitab software
following processed has been carried out.
Figure 5.1 Full factorial design-a
As shown in above window of Minitab Software to design the full factorial design of
experiments ->go to start menu ->DOE->Factorial->Create Factorial Design->general
full factorial design->designs->insert factors name and level.
Figure 5.2 Full factorial design-b
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 23
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Figure 5.3 Full factorial factors and levels design
Figure 5.4 Standard run order for DOE
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 24
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Above figure 5.4 shows the standard run of design of experiments generated in
Minitab with run order and 12 pairs of suitable parameters which is used in the
Experimental purpose for the analysis of parameters contribution.
5.2 Experimental Procedure
To evaluate the cutting force models, orthogonal cutting experiments are carried out
on a CNC machine having horizontal turret and Sinumerik 802D controller. The tool
used for machining is cemented carbide TTM8 tool with 6° rake angle and 5°
clearance angle. The rake face of the tool is flat, no chip breakers are used. The CNC
is provided with strain gauge type dynamometer Model: UIl15 to measure the cutting
forces. The experiments are made without lubricant or cooling. Work piece material
AISI304 is used in the experiment. This material is chosen because they are often
found in engineering practices. Besides, with these alloy it is easy to produce straight
and continues chips without a built up edge, which is one of the condition of sets by
cutting force models. Though this material was in initially bar shaped, they are
machined to tubular shape prior to experiments.
The full width of the tubes is machined with the straight part of the tool, as shown in
fig 5.5. Each experiment is performed at three times and showed good reproducibility
The specific measurement of cutting force and chip thickness differ less than 3% from
mean value.
To elaborate the models of Ernst-Merchant and Lee-Shaffer the shear flow
stress
of the material has to be known, whereas the model of Dautzenberg C.S.
uses the material equivalent stress ̄ . However, using the von Mises flow criteria for
plan strain condition, the shear flow stress can be related to the equivalent stress as
̄
. Since the model of Dautzenberg c.s. uses Ludwik relation ̄
, the
material behavior has to be determined in terms of specific stress C and the strain
hardening exponent n. To do so, rastegaev type compression experiment has to make.
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 25
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
[18]
Figure 5.5 Schematic drawing of orthogonal machining of tube material
5.3 Information about workpiece material AISI304
Mechanical Property:
Hardness
: 150 BHN
Density
: 7999.492458 Kg/m3
Figure 5.6 Workpiece material AISI304
The work piece material parched for experiment work is confirmed that is it AISI304
or not by test on spectro machine. Here figure 5.7 represents test report of spectro
testing, chemical composition in test bar.
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 26
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Figure 5.7 Work piece material testing report
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 27
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
5.4 Information about tool material inserts TMM 08
Figure 5.8 Cutting tool with 6 degree rack
Chemical composition:
Tungsten > 93
Carbon 6.1
Iron < 0.03
Density: 15.63g/cm3 at 18 °C
5.5 Tensile test report
For finding out forces by analytical method, it requires value of specific stress C and
shear flow stress τF is calculated from the value of tensile test. Figure 5.9 represents
tensile test report.
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 28
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Figure 5.9 Tensile test reports
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 29
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
5.6 Experimental setup for straight turning of AISI304
Figure 5.10 Experimental setup for turning AISI304
A.I.T.S.-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 30
CHAPTER 6
ANALYTICAL CALCULATION
6.1Analytical Procedure to find out forces by merchant theories:
Calculation for reading 1:
Here b=0.5mm, h=0.025mm, hc=0.16
First of all shear angle is found by measuring the chip thickness h and hc
According to merchant circle for Reading1:
Than α is known
α= rack angle from tool geometry
Putting this value of α and ϕ into equation from merchant theory
Value of β can be found out
Now
τF has to be found in suitable material test(Here tensile test is carried out)
Here from von-mises theory
For AISI304
̄
̄ 314.87 MPa
N/mm2
According to merchant circle
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 31
ANALYTICAL CALCULATION
=29N
Fv*=2291N/mm2
Ft=88 N
Ft*
N/mm2
6.2Analytical procedure to find out forces by Lee-Schaffer:
First of all shear angle is found by measuring the chip thickness h and hc
According to for Lee-scheffer Reading1:
Than α is known
α=rack angle from tool geometry
Putting this value of α and ϕ into equation from merchant theory
Value of β can be found out
According to Lee-scheffer
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 32
ANALYTICAL CALCULATION
Fv*=11997 N/mm2
Ft*=4358 N/mm2
6.3 Analytical procedure to find out forces by Dautzenberg C.S.
First of all this theory requires C and n.
N=0.44[12]
C is found out
From tensile test result
C=1370
From boundary condition
FW=9.68
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 33
ANALYTICAL CALCULATION
3.68
Fw= -F
(
(
)
)
Now,
Now,
=335N
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 34
CHAPTER 7
RESULT AND CONCLUSION
Results:7.1 Results analytically calculated by Ernst and Merchant circle
Table 7.1 analytically calculated value by Ernst and Merchant circle
No
N
Feed(h)
hc
(rpm)
mm/s
(mm)
1
1194
0.025
0.16
2
1194
0.05
3
1194
4
ϕ
h
β
Ft
Ft*
Fv
Fv*
(mm)
(N) (N/mm2) (N) (N/mm2)
9
0.025 78
88
14103
29
2291
0.23
12
0.05
72
96
7669
43
1707
0.1
0.35
16
0.1
64 101
4050
63
1266
1194
0.2
0.54
21
0.2
54 105
2100
95
945
5
1194
0.4
0.84
26
0.4
44 116
1163
149
744
6
1194
0.5
0.87
31
0.5
34
80
642
151
604
7
2387
0.025
0.13
11 0.025 74
58
9241
23
1867
8
2387
0.05
0.2
14
0.05
68
68
5475
36
1455
9
2387
0.1
0.31
18
0.1
60
77
3074
56
1117
10
2387
0.2
0.48
23
0.2
50
83
1651
85
855
11
2387
0.4
0.79
28
0.4
40
92
921
136
682
12
2387
0.5
0.95
29
0.5
38 102
818
164
655
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 35
RESULT AND CONCLUSION
7.2 Results analytically calculated by Lee and Schaffer.
Table 7.2 analytically calculated by Lee and Schaffer.
No
β
Feed(h)
(rpm)
mm/s
1
1194
0.025
0.16
9 42
54
4358
75
11997
2
1194
0.05
0.23 12 39
57
2286
88
7040
3
1194
0.1
0.35 16 35
58
1158 104
4177
4
1194
0.2
0.54 21 30
57
575 129
2581
5
1194
0.4
0.84 26 25
61
307 179
1785
6
1194
0.5
0.87 31 20
41
165 166
1327
7
2387
0.025
0.13 11 40
35
2787
52
8263
8
2387
0.05
0.19 15 37
40
1597
66
5315
9
2387
0.1
0.31 18 33
43
863
85
3386
10
2387
0.2
0.48 23 28
45
445 110
2204
11
2387
0.4
0.79 28 23
48
241 157
1574
12
2387
0.5
0.95 29 22
53
213 186
1484
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
hc
ϕ
N
Ft
FT*
Fv
(N) (N/mm2) (N)
Fv*
(N/mm2)
Page 36
RESULT AND CONCLUSION
7.3 Results calculated by Dautzenberg C.S. model:
Table 7.3: Analytically calculated result Dautzenberg c.s.
No Speed
Feed (H)
hc
ϕ
ƐAB
Fw
Fv
Fv*
Ft
Ft*
(N)
(N/mm2) (N)
(N/mm2)
(rpm)
mm/s
1
1194
0.025
0.16
9 3.68
7.4
786
62880 335
26800
2
1194
0.05
0.23 12 2.78
8.4
800
32009 334
13360
3
1194
0.1
0.35 16 2.12
9.5
820
16397 243
4860
4
1194
0.2
0.54 21 1.66 11.3
877
8765 183
1830
5
1194
0.4
0.84 26 1.39 15.1
1075
5373 164
820
6
1194
0.5
0.87 31 1.23 13.7
895
3580 101
404
7
2387
0.025
0.13 11 3.02
5
490
39237 226
18080
8
2387
0.05
0.19 15
2.4
6.2
559
22348 195
7800
9
2387
0.1
0.31 18
1.9
7.6
625
12493 160
3200
10
2387
0.2
0.48 23 1.54
9.5
712
7116 131
1310
11
2387
0.4
0.79 28 1.32 13.1
906
4532 123
615
12
2387
0.5
0.95 29 1.29 15.4
1045
4179 133
532
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 37
RESULT AND CONCLUSION
7.4 Experimentally measured value of cutting forces.
Table 7.4: Experimentaly measured value of cutting forces.
No
N
Feed
(rpm)
(h)
hc
Φ
Ft
Ft*
Fv
Fv*
(N)
N/mm2
(N)
N/mm2
mm/s
1
1194
0.025
0.16
9
69
5494
147
6288
2
1194
0.05
0.23
12
78
3139
167
3201
3
1194
0.1
0.35
16
78
1570
226
1640
4
1194
0.2
0.54
21
98
981
206
877
5
1194
0.4
0.84
26
88
441
324
537
6
1194
0.5
0.87
31
108
432
265
358
7
2387
0.025
0.13
11
49
3924
98
3924
8
2387
0.05
0.2
14
59
2354
137
2235
9
2387
0.1
0.31
18
59
1177
147
1249
10
2387
0.2
0.48
23
69
687
206
712
11
2387
0.4
0.79
28
88
441
226
453
12
2387
0.5
0.95
29
108
432
284
418
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 38
RESULT AND CONCLUSION
18000
16000
14000
12000
Ft*d
10000
Ft*e
Ft*l
8000
Ft*m
6000
4000
2000
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
Figure 7.1 Shear angle ϕ Vs thrust force Ft* at 0.25, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 ,0.5 feed
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 39
RESULT AND CONCLUSION
39000
36000
33000
30000
27000
24000
Fv*M
21000
Fv*L
18000
Fv*D
15000
Fv*ex
12000
9000
6000
3000
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
Figure 7.2 Shear angle ϕ Vs feed force Fv* for 0.25, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.5 feed
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
spee 1194
speed 2387
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Figure 7.3 Feed Vs shear angle.
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 40
RESULT AND CONCLUSION
Conclusion:
Each marker in above figures 7.1 and 7.2 represents an average of three experiments
carried out at identical cutting condition. Comparing the experiment to the model of
Dautzenberg c.s, it is clear that both forces are overestimated considerably for the
whole range of shear angles. Although the model of merchant, it gives much better
results as the lee and Schaffer model regarding the main cutting force (Fv). However,
for low shear angle the thrust force is predicted far too high compared the
measurement. In general, the best results are obtained with the slip-line field theory
based model of Lee and Shaffer, that predicts especially the main cutting rather
accuracy. As for the Dautzenberg c.s. model, however, the mismatch between theory
and experiment becomes more evident for low shear angles where it shows the
tendency to underestimate the thrust force. Given that the low shear angles are found
for feed rate (0.025-.05), this underestimation can be expected. For, in case of low
feed rates the cutting edge radius is of same order, or even bigger, than the
undeformed chip thickness. As a result the ploughing forces that are not considered by
the models will become a more dominant factor. The underestimation of the thrust
force is therefore, in fact, a strong argument in favour of the lee and Schaffer model.
Fig 7.3 shows the graph of feed verses shear angle, when keeping the cutting
speed constant and changing feed sequentially shear angle increases drastically. If the
amount of spindle speed increases the value of shear angle increase compare to low
speed for same feed. At the more feed rate there mismatch accurse for shear angle and
amount of shear angle is more for high speed for same feed rate
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 41
FUTURE SCOPE
In industry related where machining is used cutting force is more influencing
factor. For determining forces out of many available methods it is great deal to choose
appropriate method predict force for particular material. Also there are numbers of
material are newly found out now a days for different application in industry.
Validation these models with these newly found material and evaluation of these
forces with that material and analysis of result with each other can be done.
AITS-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 42
REFERENCES
Research papers
[1] H jordan, C bernal, A M Camacho “Application of response surface methodology
for determining cutting force model in turning of LM6/SiCP metal matrix composite”.
AFS Transactions, 1990, p463-474
[2] B. de Augustin, C. Bernal, A.M. Camacho,E.M. Rubio “Experimental Analysis of
the Cutting Forces Obtained in Dry Turning Processes of UNS A97075 Aluminum
Alloys”, AFS Transactions, 139, 1976, p 631-639
[3] Viktor P. Astakhov, Xinran Xiao“A Methodology for practical cutting force
evaluation based on the energy spent in the cutting system”, Int. J. Cast Metals Res.,
Vol. 9, 1996, p1-7
[4] W.S. Lin, B.Y. Lee, C.L. Wu “Modelling the surface roughness and cutting force
for turning”, vol. 2, 2010, p102-106, January- February
[5] A. Shams, M. Mashayekhi, “Improvement of orthogonal cutting simulation with a
nonlocal damage model ,Indian Foundry Journal, vol. 53(6), 2007, p71-78
[6] A. Molinari, A. Moufki “The Merchant’s model of orthogonal cutting revisited:A
new insight into the modelling of chip formation”, AFS Transactions, vol. 82, 1974,
p535-542
[7]W.B. Lee, et. al “Effect of material anisotropy on shear angle prediction in metal
cutting—a mesoplasticity approach”2003
[8] Zhongtao Fu, et al “Analytical modelling of chatter vibration in orthogonal cutting
using a predictive force model” 2014
[9]A. Pramanik et al “Prediction of cutting forces in machining of metal matrix
composites” 2006
A.I.T.S RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 43
[10] M. Cotterella, E. Ares b, J. Yanes, F. López, P. Hernandez, G. Peláez “A Holistic
Approach to Zero Defect Castings”, Copyright 2009 American Foundry Society
[11]H. Ernst, M. E. merchant, "chip formation, friction and high quality machined
surfaces", transaction of the american society of metals, Vol. 29 , p.299-335.1941
[12]E. H. Lee, B.W. shaffer, "The theory of plasticity applied to problem of
machining", journal of applied mechanics vol. 18(4). pp. 405-413, 1951
[13] J.H. Dautzenberg, et al “The Minimum Energy Principle Applied to the Cutting
Process of Various Workpiece Materials and Tool Rake Angles” Volume 31, Issue 1,
1982, Pages 91–96
Books
[14]Serge Jaspers, Metal cutting mechanics and material behaviour, CIP-Data library
technische universiteit eindhoven, copyright 1999.
[15] Boothroyd, Knight G, Fundamentals of machining and machine tools, CRC
Taylor & Francis group.2006
[16] B.L.Juneja, G.S.sekhon,Nitin Seth, Fundamental of metal cutting and machine
tools,1987
[17]P.N.Rao, manufacturing technology metal cutting and machine tools, vol 2,2013
Websites
[18] http://www.slideshare.net/VipulMulani/unit-4-machine-machining-process
[19] http://www.slideshare.net/shunty12/machine-tool-machining-me-2102
[20] http://www.slideshare.net/palanivendhan/metal-cutting-38254541
[21] http://engineeringhut.blogspot.in/2010/11/types-of-chips.html
A.I.T.S RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 44
Appendix A
PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 45
Appendix-B
REVIEW CARD
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 46
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 47
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 48
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 49
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 50
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 51
Appendix C
COMPLIANCE REPORT
During the study and preparation of dissertation, following two stages
are being previewed by the reviewed by the reviewer and they will give their
comment how it will resolve at each stage is being summarized in given table
Sr.
No
1
2
Phase
Dissertation
Phase -1
Mid Semester
Review
Comments Given By
External Examiners
 Analytical model need
to be applied other
than merchant circle.
 Lot of variability
regarding material,
model & parameter
affecting->concise
work is need
 Objectives are vague
Modification Done Based On
Comments
 3 Methods are used for
analytical solution



Experiment should be
performed on CNC
machine
Methodology is
incorrect
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)

Analysis is done using SS304
material and process parameter
is decided with Minitab
software

Focused on cutting force for
orthogonal cutting
Experiment is carried out using
CNC

Methodology is changed and
methodology is adopted from
research paper..
Page 52
Appendix D
PLAGIARISM REPORT
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 53
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 54
A.I.T.S-RAJKOT (2014-15)
Page 55