Advertisement

Grain size sensitive–MTS model for Ti-6Al-4V machining force and residual stress prediction

  • Yanfei Lu
  • Zhipeng PanEmail author
  • Peter Bocchini
  • Hamid Garmestani
  • Steven Liang
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

Material properties are significantly influenced by the parameters of the machining process. The accurate prediction of machining force and residual stress reduces power consumption, enhances material properties, and improves dimensional accuracy of the finished product. Traditional method using the finite element analysis (FEA) costs a significant amount of time, and the archived mechanical threshold stress (MTS) model without consideration of microstructure of the material yields inaccurate result. In this paper, a grain size–sensitive MTS model is introduced for the machining process of Ti-6Al-4V. A grain size–sensitive term is introduced to the modified MTS model to account for evolution of the grain size. The grain size–sensitive MTS model takes the microstructure of the Ti-6Al-4V into consideration for the calculation of machining force and residual stress. The grain size–sensitive term is introduced into the athermal stress component using the initial yield stress, strain hardening coefficient, and the Hall-Petch coefficient. The analytical result is compared with those of experimental studies and the traditional Johnson-Cook model to prove the validity in the prediction of machining force and residual stress. The proposed model explores a new area for calculating cutting forces and residual stress.

Keywords

Microstructure Flow stress Machining Force prediction Residual stress 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sima M, Özel T (2010) Modified material constitutive models for serrated chip formation simulations and experimental validation in machining of titanium alloy Ti–6Al–4V. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50(11):943–960Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fang N (2003) Slip-line modeling of machining with a rounded-edge tool—part I: new model and theory. J Mech Phys Solids 51(4):715–742zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fang N, Jawahir I, Oxley P (2001) A universal slip-line model with non-unique solutions for machining with curled chip formation and a restricted contact tool. Int J Mech Sci 43(2):557–580zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Roth R, Oxley P (1972) Slip-line field analysis for orthogonal machining based upon experimental flow fields. J Mech Eng Sci 14(2):85–97Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Oxley P (1998) Development and application of a predictive machining theory. Mach Sci Technol 2(2):165–189Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pawade R, Joshi SS, Brahmankar P (2008) Effect of machining parameters and cutting edge geometry on surface integrity of high-speed turned Inconel 718. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 48(1):15–28Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Son SM, Lim HS, Ahn JH (2005) Effects of the friction coefficient on the minimum cutting thickness in micro cutting. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(4–5):529–535Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yun HT, Heo S, Lee MK, Min BK, Lee SJ (2011) Ploughing detection in micromilling processes using the cutting force signal. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 51(5):377–382Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang Y et al (2018) The micro-cutting performance of cermet and coated WC micro-mills in machining of TC4 alloy micro-grooves. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 96(1–4):1403–1414Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Campbell CE, Bendersky LA, Boettinger WJ, Ivester R (2006) Microstructural characterization of Al-7075-T651 chips and work pieces produced by high-speed machining. Mater Sci Eng A 430(1–2):15–26Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Calamaz M, Coupard D, Nouari M, Girot F (2011) Numerical analysis of chip formation and shear localisation processes in machining the Ti-6Al-4V titanium alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 52(9):887–895Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bäker M, Rösler J, Siemers C (2002) A finite element model of high speed metal cutting with adiabatic shearing. Comput Struct 80(5):495–513Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kassner M et al (2002) Large-strain softening of aluminum in shear at elevated temperature. Metall Mater Trans A 33(10):3145–3153Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang Z, Rahman M, Wong Y (2005) Tool wear characteristics of binderless CBN tools used in high-speed milling of titanium alloys. Wear 258(5–6):752–758Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Che-Haron C, Jawaid A (2005) The effect of machining on surface integrity of titanium alloy Ti–6% Al–4% V. J Mater Process Technol 166(2):188–192Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ahmed T, Rack H (1998) Phase transformations during cooling in α+ β titanium alloys. Mater Sci Eng A 243(1–2):206–211Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ulutan D, Ozel T (2011) Machining induced surface integrity in titanium and nickel alloys: a review. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 51(3):250–280Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pan Z, Liang SY, Garmestani H, Shih DS (2016) Prediction of machining-induced phase transformation and grain growth of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 87(1–4):859–866Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sun S, Brandt M, Dargusch M (2009) Characteristics of cutting forces and chip formation in machining of titanium alloys. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 49(7–8):561–568Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang Q, Liu Z, Wang B, Song Q, Wan Y (2016) Evolutions of grain size and micro-hardness during chip formation and machined surface generation for Ti-6Al-4V in high-speed machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 82(9):1725–1736Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Follansbee P, Gray G (1989) An analysis of the low temperature, low and high strain-rate deformation of Ti−6Al−4V. Metall Trans A 20(5):863–874Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pan Z, Shih DS, Tabei A, Garmestani H, Liang SY (2017) Modeling of Ti-6Al-4V machining force considering material microstructure evolution. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 91(5):2673–2680Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Estrin Y, Tóth LS, Molinari A, Bréchet Y (1998) A dislocation-based model for all hardening stages in large strain deformation. Acta Mater 46(15):5509–5522Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Atmani Z, Haddag B, Nouari M, Zenasni M (2016) Combined microstructure-based flow stress and grain size evolution models for multi-physics modelling of metal machining. Int J Mech Sci 118:77–90Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pan Z, et al. (2017) Residual stress prediction for turning of Ti-6Al-4V considering the microstructure evolution. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf p. 0954405417712551Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Follansbee P, Kocks U (1988) A constitutive description of the deformation of copper based on the use of the mechanical threshold stress as an internal state variable. Acta Metall 36(1):81–93Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pan Z, Liang SY, and Garmestani H (2018) Finite element simulation of residual stress in machining of Ti-6Al-4V with a microstructural consideration. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf p. 0954405418769927Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Banerjee B (2007) The mechanical threshold stress model for various tempers of AISI 4340 steel. Int J Solids Struct 44(3–4):834–859Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wanying L, Yuanhua L, Yuhai C, Taihe S, Singh A (2017) Effect of different heat treatments on microstructure and mechanical properties of Ti6Al4V titanium alloy. Rare Metal Mater Eng 46(3):634–639Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bogucki R, Mosór K, Nykiel M (2014) Effect of heat treatment conditions on the morphology of α phase and mechanical properties in Ti-10V-2Fe-3Al titanium alloy/Wpływ Warunków Obróbki Cieplnej Na Morfologie Fazy α I Własności Mechaniczne W Stopie Tytanu Ti-10V-2Fe-3Al. Arch Metall Mater 59(4):1269–1273Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    MacDougall D and Maudlin P (2000) The proportion of plastic work converted to heat in ti6al4v: mts model prediction and experimental data Los Alamos National Lab., NM (US)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Peng F et al (2016) Analytical modeling and experimental validation of residual stress in micro-end-milling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 87(9–12):3411–3424Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bao W, Tansel I (2000) Modeling micro-end-milling operations. Part I: analytical cutting force model. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 40(15):2155–2173Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dogra M, Sharma V, Dureja J (2011) Effect of tool geometry variation on finish turning-a review. J Eng Sci Technol Rev 4(1):1–13Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Karpat Y, Zeren E, and Ozel T (2000) Workpiece material model based predictions for machining processes. Society of Manufacturing EngineersGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Oxley P, Hastings W (1977) Predicting the strain rate in the zone of intense shear in which the chip is formed in machining from the dynamic flow stress properties of the work material and the cutting conditions. Proc R Soc Lond A 356(1686):395–410Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Huang Y, Liang SY (2003) Cutting forces modeling considering the effect of tool thermal property—application to CBN hard turning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 43(3):307–315Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Oxley P, Hastings W (1976) Minimum work as a possible criterion for determining the frictional conditions at the tool/chip interface in machining. Philos Trans R Soc Lond A 282(1310):565–584Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Boothroyd G (1963) Temperatures in orthogonal metal cutting. Proc Inst Mech Eng 177(1):789–810Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pan Z, Feng Y, Lu YT, Lin YF, Hung TP, Hsu FC, Liang SY (2017) Force modeling of Inconel 718 laser-assisted end milling under recrystallization effects. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 92(5–8):2965–2974Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Liang SY and Shih AJ (2015) Analysis of machining and machine tools SpringerGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Su JC (2006) Residual stress modeling in machining processes Georgia Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Budak E, Altintas Y, Armarego E (1996) Prediction of milling force coefficients from orthogonal cutting data. J Manuf Sci Eng 118(2):216–224Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Atmani Z, Haddag B, Nouari M, Zenasni M (2015) Multi-physics modelling in machining OFHC copper–coupling of microstructure-based flow stress and grain refinement models. Procedia CIRP 31:545–550Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pathak B, Sahoo K, Mishra M (2013) Effect of machining parameters on cutting forces and surface roughness in Al-(1-2) Fe-1V-1Si alloys. Mater Manuf Process 28(4):463–469Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    McDowell D (1997) An approximate algorithm for elastic-plastic two-dimensional rolling/sliding contact. Wear 211(2):237–246Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Pan Z, Feng Y, Ji X, Liang SY (2018) Turning induced residual stress prediction of AISI 4130 considering dynamic recrystallization. Mach Sci Technol 22(3):507–521Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mendenhall M (2016) Powder diffraction SRMsGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Capello E (2005) Residual stresses in turning: part I: influence of process parameters. J Mater Process Technol 160(2):221–228Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pan Z (2018) Predictive modeling for material microstructure affected machining Georgia Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Liang SY, Su JC (2007) Residual stress modeling in orthogonal machining. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 56(1):65–68MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yanfei Lu
    • 1
  • Zhipeng Pan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Peter Bocchini
    • 2
  • Hamid Garmestani
    • 3
  • Steven Liang
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Woodruff School of Mechanical EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Boeing Research and TechnologyHuntsvilleUSA
  3. 3.School of Materials Science and EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  4. 4.College of Mechanical EngineeringDonghua UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations