Machining β-titanium alloy under carbon dioxide snow and micro-lubrication: a study on tool deflection, energy consumption, and tool damage

  • Asif IqbalEmail author
  • Dirk Biermann
  • Hussain Abbas
  • Khalid A. Al-Ghamdi
  • Maximilian Metzger


The alloys of the beta allotropic form of titanium are among the most difficult-to-cut materials. An extremely poor machinability calls for special ways of performing machining with an emphasis on developing new methods of heat dissipation. The paper focuses on evaluating effectiveness of using CO2 snow as a coolant in continuous machining of a β-titanium alloy. It also explores the most appropriate location of its application in the cutting area and usefulness of its hybridization with minimum quantity of lubrication. The effectiveness of using the two cutting fluids is compared with an emulsion-based flood coolant. The effects of varying work material’s yield strength and cutting speed are also investigated. The measured responses include tool displacement area (a measure of tool deflection obtained from tool acceleration data), cutting energy consumed (obtained from acoustic emissions data), and tool wear. The results show that the usage of CO2 snow and its location of application possess a significant effect on the responses. The combination of CO2 snow and minimum quantity of lubrication is found to be the most effective way of heat dissipation and lubrication. With regard to tool damage, the scanning electron microscopy shows the presence of gradual wear and cutting speed-dependent adhesion but no evidence of chipping. The paper also presents a possibility of estimating tool damage condition through acoustic emission and tool deflection data. In this regard, a strong uphill relationship between tool wear and cutting energy is observed.


Acoustic emission Minimum quantity of lubrication (MQL) Emulsion Grooving Cutting speed 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dandekar CR, Shin YC, Barnes J (2010) Machinability improvement of titanium alloy (Ti–6Al–4V) via LAM and hybrid machining. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50(2):174–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rashid RR, Sun S, Wang G, Dargusch MS (2012) An investigation of cutting forces and cutting temperatures during laser-assisted machining of the Ti–6Cr–5Mo–5V–4Al beta titanium alloy. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 63:58–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Machai C, Biermann D (2011) Machining of β-titanium-alloy Ti–10V–2Fe–3Al under cryogenic conditions: cooling with carbon dioxide snow. J Mater Process Technol 211:1175–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bermingham MJ, Kirsch J, Sun S, Palanisamy S, Dargusch MS (2011) New observations on tool life, cutting forces and chip morphology in cryogenic machining Ti-6Al-4V. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 51(6):500–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rahman MM, Khan MAR, Kadirgama K, Noor MM, Bakar RA (2010) Modeling of material removal on machining of Ti-6Al-4V through EDM using copper tungsten electrode and positive polarity. World academy of science, engineering and technology, 71:576–581.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lei S, Liu W (2002) High-speed machining of titanium alloys using the driven rotary tool. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 42:653–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Trent EM, Wright PK (2000) Metal cutting, 4th edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ginting A, Nouari M (2006) Experimental and numerical studies on the performance of alloyed carbide tool in dry milling of aerospace material. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 46(7–8):758–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zlatin N, Field M (1972) Procedures and precautions in machining titanium alloys. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Titanium Sci. & Tech., CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rahman M, Wong YS, Zareena AR (2003) Machinability of titanium alloys. JSME Int J Ser C Mech Syst Mach Elem Manuf 46:107–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kirk DC (1976–7) Tools and dies for industry. In: Proceedings of Conference 76/77, Metallurgy Society, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freeman RM (1974) The machining of titanium and some of its alloys. University of Birmingham, BirminghamGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Donachie MJ (2000) Titanium—a technical guide. ASM International, OhioGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arrazola P-J, Garay A, Iriarte L-M, Armendia M, Maryab S, Le Maitre F (2009) Machinability of titanium alloys (Ti6Al4V and Ti555.3). J Mater Process Technol 209:2223–2230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jawaid A, Che-Haron CH, Abdullah A (1999) Tool wear characteristics in turning of titanium alloy Ti-6246. J Mater Process Technol 92–93:329–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zoya ZA, Krishnamurthy R (2000) The performance of CBN tools in the machining of titanium alloys. J Mater Process Technol 100(1):80–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ramirez C, Ismail AI, Gendarme C, Dehmas M, Aeby-Gautier E, Poulachon G, Rossi F (2017) Understanding the diffusion wear mechanisms of WC-10% Co carbide tools during dry machining of titanium alloys. Wear 390:61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hong SY, Ding Y, Jeong J (2002) Experimental evaluation of friction coefficient and liquid nitrogen lubrication effect in cryogenic machining. J Mech Sci Technol 6:235–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hong SY, Markus I, Jeong W (2001) New cooling approach and tool life improvement in cryogenic machining of titanium alloy Ti–6Al–4V. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 41:2245–2260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dhananchezian M, Kumar MP (2011) Cryogenic turning of the Ti–6Al–4V alloy with modified cutting tool inserts. Cryogenics 51:34–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sun S, Brandt M, Dargusch MS (2010) Machining Ti–6Al–4V alloy with cryogenic compressed air cooling. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50:933–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sun Y, Huang B, Puleo DA, Jawahir IS (2015) Enhanced machinability of Ti-5553 alloy from cryogenic machining: comparison with MQL and flood-cooled machining and modeling. Procedia CIRP 31:477–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gariani S, Shyha I, Inam F, Huo D (2017) Evaluation of a novel controlled cutting fluid impinging supply system when machining titanium alloys. Appl Sci 7(6):560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Machai C, Iqbal A, Biermann D, Upmeier T, Schumann S (2013) On the effects of cutting speed and cooling methodologies in grooving operation of various tempers of β-titanium alloy. J Mater Process Technol 213(7):1027–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Maradei C, Piotrkowski R, Serrano E, Ruzzante JE (2003) Acoustic emission signal analysis in machining processes using wavelet packets. Lat Am Appl Res 33(4)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Min S, Lidde J, Raue N, Dornfeld D (2011) Acoustic emission based tool contact detection for ultraprecision machining. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 60(1):141–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Neslušan M, Mičieta B, Mičietová A, Čilliková M, Mrkvica I (2015) Detection of tool breakage during hard turning through acoustic emission at low removal rates. Measurement 70:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Maia LHA, Abrao AM, Vasconcelos WL, Sales WF, Machado AR (2015) A new approach for detection of wear mechanisms and determination of tool life in turning using acoustic emission. Tribol Int:92519–92532Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kosaraju S, Anne VG, Popuri BB (2013) Online tool condition monitoring in turning titanium (grade 5) using acoustic emission: modeling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 67(5–8):1947–1958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yang Y, Zhang WH, Ma YC, Wan M (2016) Chatter prediction for the peripheral milling of thin-walled workpieces with curved surfaces. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 109:36–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kalinski KJ, Galewski MA (2015) Optimal spindle speed determination for vibration reduction during ball-end milling of flexible details. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 92:19–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ryu SH, Lee HS, Chu CN (2003) The form error prediction in side wall machining considering tool deflection. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 43(14):1405–1411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Duan X, Peng F, Yan R, Zhu Z Li B (2014) Experimental study on cutter deflection in multi-axis NC machining. In: Int. Conf. Intelligent Robotics and Applications. Springer International Publishing, pp 99–109Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mamedov A, Lazoglu I (2013) Machining forces and tool deflections in micro milling. Procedia CIRP 8:147–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mehta P, Mears L (2011) Model based prediction and control of machining deflection error in turning slender bars. In: ASME 2011 Int. Manuf. Sci. & Eng. Conf., American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp 263–271Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Park KH, Olortegui-Yume J, Yoon MC, Kwon P (2010) A study on droplets and their distribution for minimum quantity lubrication (MQL). Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50(9):824–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Asif Iqbal
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dirk Biermann
    • 2
  • Hussain Abbas
    • 3
  • Khalid A. Al-Ghamdi
    • 4
  • Maximilian Metzger
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Integrated TechnologiesUniversiti Brunei DarussalamGadongBrunei Darussalam
  2. 2.Institute of Machining Technology (ISF)Technische Universität DortmundDortmundGermany
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Institute of Avionics and Aeronautics (IAA)Air UniversityIslamabadPakistan
  4. 4.Department of Industrial EngineeringKing Abdulaziz UniversityJeddahSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations