V. Chandrasekharan Caterpillar S. Athavale, R. Furness Ford

1
Assessment of Machining Models
V. Chandrasekharan (Caterpillar) S. Athavale, R.
Furness (Ford) R. Stevenson (General Motors)
R. Ghosh (Kennametal) M. A. Davies, R.
Ivester, M. Kennedy (NIST) M. Leu (NSF)
History Goals Detailed Plan Timetable Logistics/We
b Address Respondents Details Contacts
Simulation of cutting AISI 1045 Vc 5 m/s and
feed 25 mm.
2

• Talks were given by by industrial representatives
  from Ford, General Motors, Boeing, Caterpillar
  Sandvik at 1st CIRP modeling meeting in Atlanta
  (May 1998)
• Richard Furness suggested that the industrial
  representatives devise an industrially relevant
  example problem for assessing machining models.
  This sparked an animated discussion.
• Meeting at GM tech center with Ming Leu, Richard
  Furness, Shounak Athavale, Vivek Shandrasakar
  Robin Stevenson produced the Assessment of
  Machining Models (AMM) effort (Summer 1998)
• Discussions continued at CIRP Athens where NIST
  agreed to participate (Aug. 1998)
• Surveys distributed at ASME meeting in Anaheim
  (Nov. 1998)
• More specific plan was developed (Feb. 1999)
• Proposal for support for materials submitted to
  NSF (May 1999)
• Industry sponsors and NIST have secured matching
  support
• Kick-off of the technical effort (NAMRC 1999)

History of the Effort
3
Industrial Vision
4

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

Goals
5

• (1) A set of machining experiments will be
  conducted on AISI 1045 Steel
• Orthogonal Cutting Calibration of the models
• Cutting Parameters will be released
• Forces, Temperatures and results of Accelerated
  Wear Tests Released
• Orthogonal Cutting Assessment of the models
• Cutting parameters released
• Forces and temperatures measured but not released
• Turning Assessment of Models
• Cutting parameters released
• Forces, temperatures wear measured but not
  released
• (2) Predictions collected
• (3) Unbiased Report of Results Written
• (4) Workshop held to discuss future directions

Summary of Proposed Effort
6

• Types of Experiments
• Workpiece Material
• AISI 1045 Steel
• Single Batch, 30.5 meters of 102 mm diameter bar
• Subjected to Metallurgical and Chemical Analysis
• Tubes Machined from Bar at NIST and Distributed
• Sufficient Material for Small Samples to be
  Distributed
• Tools
• P20 Carbide Inserts
• Standard Holders
• Coolant
• None

Detailed Plan - Types of Experiments
7

• Types of Measurements
• Prediction goals Force, Temperature, Tool Wear
• 1. Forces
• Representative time series from Orthogonal
  Cutting Tests - Sample rate?
• For turning experiments, three components will be
  measured at low sample rate (100 Hz) with long
  time constant setting on a piezoelectric
  dynamometer
• Average forces reported at predetermined
  intervals through the wear tests
• 2. Temperatures
• Two labs will report intrinsic thermocouple data
• (Potential) NIST is developing new
  micro-pyrometry system
• 3. Tool Wear (ISO 3865 Used as a Guide)
• Flank wear reported as VBmax measured optically
  at the
• same time as force measurements are taken
• Qualitative SEM measurements of final tool
  condition
• (Potential) White light interferometer or stylus
  measurements of final tool geometry
• (Potential) Sample tool sections

Detailed Plan - Measurements
8

• Measurements to Ensure Lab to Lab Consistency
• 1. Initial and Final Surface Finish
• Provides a check on cutting parameters and wear
• 2. Material Chemical Composition and
  Microstructure
• Single batch will be used for all tests to be
  tested and distributed to test labs
• 3. Tool composition and initial geometry
• Single set of tool inserts will be obtained,
  checked and distributed to test labs
• 4. Rudimentary characterization of CNC lathes
• Characterization of Static errors Tool Tip
  FRFs with Dynamometer
• 5. Chip form and morphology
• Macroscopic digital photographs rudimentary
  metallurgical examination

Detailed Plan - Measurements Disclosed
9

• Equipment

Detailed Plan - Facilities
10
NIST IR Microscopy Facility

• ATP Funded 3 Year Project in Year 1
• Manufacturing Lab
• Physics Lab
• Applied Mathematics Lab
• Initial Focus AISI 1045
• Goal Specifications
• Field of View 0.5 mm square
• Resolution 5 mm
• Temperature Range 2000 C
• Bandwidth???
• Diamond-turning
• class machine
• Custom tool-post and
• workpiece assembly

11

• Orthogonal Cutting
• Model Calibration Data
• Force, Temperature
• One Accelerated Wear Test

Repeated for both coated and uncoated tools
Detailed Plan - Experimental Parameters
12

• Orthogonal Cutting
• Data For Prediction
• Only Parameters Released
• Data is both inside and
• outside the
• calibration box

Repeated for both coated and uncoated tools
Detailed Plan - Experimental Parameters
13
Dynamometer

• Turning
• Data For Prediction
• Only Parameters Released
• Data is both inside and
• outside the
• calibration box

Tool Holder P20 Insert
Turret and Slide
1045 Bar
Spindle
Tailstock
Repeated for both uncoated, round-nosed coated
chipbreaker
Detailed Plan - Experimental Parameters
14
(Trent,1991)
1000 C
600
Rapid Diffusive Wear - Cratering
100
Slow Diffusive Wear - Cratering
Speed (m/min)
10
Built-up Edge Attrition
600 C
1
0.03
0.1
1
Feed (mm/rev)
Detailed Plan - The "Physcial Ballpark"
15

• Availability of Data
• Web site www.nist.gov/amm
• Numerical data available as ASCII or Microsoft
  Excel
• Visual data available as digital photo downloads
• Participation
• Obtain data on cutting experiments make
  predictions by whatever means desired
• Report results
• Description of Approach
• Predictions
• Discussion
• Reports collected and reported in summary article
• Workshop held at NIST with participants from the
  AMM

Obtaining Data Participating
16

• Order Materials (May 1999)
• Conduct Chemical and Metallurgical Analysis on
  Material
• (June 7, 1999)
• Parse Material and Machine Tube and Bar Stock
• (July 7, 1999)
• Receive Tooling (July 1999)
• Measure Machine Tool FRFs at Each Lab (June
  1999)
• Distribute Bar and Tube Stock (July 14, 1999)
• Orthogonal Cutting Tests for Model Calibration
• (July-Sept. 1999)
• Orthogonal Cutting Tests for Assessment
  (Sept.-Oct. 1999)
• Turning Tests (Oct.-Nov. 1999)
• Progress Report (ASME Nov. Meeting)

Preliminary Time Table
17

• 1. T. Altan, Ohio State University
• 2. E. J.A. Armarego, University of Melbourne,
  Australia
• 3. Y. Altintas, University of British Columbia
• 4. S. Bukkapatnam, USC
• 5. T. Dow, North Carolina State University
• 6. I. S. Jawahir O. Dillon, University of
  Kentucky
• 7. T.-C. Jen, University of Wisconsin
• 8. J. C. Hamann, Ecole Centrale de Nantes,
  France
• 9. S. Kapoor D. Devor, Univeristy of Illinois,
  IC
• 10. Y. Koren, University of Michigan
• 11. J. Leopold, Society for Production
  Engineering and Development, Germany
• 12. X. Li, National, University of Singapore
• 13. V. Madhavan, Witchita State University
• 14. T. Marusich, Third Wave Systems
• 15. P. Oxely T. Arsecularatne, University of
  NSW Australia
• 16. Y. Shin, Purdue University
• 17. A. Srinivasta, IAMS
• 18. C.A. Van Luttervelt, Technical University of
  Delft, Netherlands
• 19. P. K. Venuvinod, City University of Hong
  Kong

Likely Participants
18
For More Information Contact...
Dr. Robert Ivester NIST 100 Bureau Drive,
Stop 8220 Gaithersburg MD 20899-8220 USA
[phone] rob.ivester_at_nist.gov
Dr. Matthew Davies NIST 100 Bureau Drive,
Stop 8220 Gaithersburg MD 20899-8220 USA
[phone] matthew.davies_at_nist.gov
Contact Rob if your name is not on the list of
likely participants.
Details Contacts