Specific cutting energy: a physical measurement for representing tool wear

  • Antoine ProteauEmail author
  • Antoine Tahan
  • Marc Thomas


In a machining context, unexpected tool breakage is still one of the primary causes of increase costs and machine downtimes. Hence, to increase productivity and ensure a company’s financial survival, a way to monitor cutting tool is essential. Thus, this paper proposes to show that it is possible to predict tool wear, with a low error, by using a recurrent neural network with a long short-term memory architecture. However, to achieve a general tool condition monitoring model, a proposition requiring no training is needed. Therefore, this paper introduces the concept of specific cutting energy based on the work of Debongnie [1], which is defined as the amount of energy required to remove 1 cm3 of material. Based on our work, we show that this feature is highly correlated (R > 90%) to the tool wear value. This concept also achieve a high adjusted R2 (R2 > 90%) with a linear regression model. These results are based on an experimental dataset provided by Agogino and Goebel [2]. We succeed in achieving our objectives; however, future work should include a methodology to measure the residual useful life of a cutting tool based on the specific cutting energy and an industrial application of our methodology to see if the results support our conclusions. Still, our proposition could help machining companies accurately monitor their cutting tool wear condition with a single feature.


Tool condition monitoring Cutting energy EWMA chart Machine learning Recurrent neural network Long short-term memory architecture 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The authors would like to thank UC Berkely and NASA Ames Prognostic Data Repository for providing the Milling Dataset.

Funding information

This work received financial support from the Fonds de Recherche du Québec – Nature et Technologies (FRQNT) through grant #257668.


  1. 1.
    Debongnie J-F (2006) Usinage. Editions du CEFAL,Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agogino A, Goebel K (2007) Milling Data Set Accessed 23 May 2018
  3. 3.
    Kohler D, Weisz J-D (2016) Industrie 4.0 Les défis de la transformation numérique du modèle industriel allemand. FranceGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhou Y, Xue W (2018) Review of tool condition monitoring methods in milling processes. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–15Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gebremariam MA, Xiang Yuan S, Azhari A, Lemma TA (2017) Remaining tool life prediction based on force sensors signal during end milling of Stavax ESR Steel. In: ASME 2017 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Tampa, Florida, USA, November 3-9, 2017. vol 58356. Volume 2: Advanced Manufacturing, p V002T002A094Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang JZ, Chen JC (2008) Tool condition monitoring in an end-milling operation based on the vibration signal collected through a microcontroller-based data acquisition system. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 39(1):118–128MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jiang X, Li B, Mao X, Hao C, Liu H (2018) Tool condition monitoring based on dynamic sensitivity of a tool-workpiece system. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 98:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yu J, Liang S, Tang D, Liu H (2016) A weighted hidden Markov model approach for continuous-state tool wear monitoring and tool life prediction. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–11Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aghazadeh F, Tahan A, Thomas M (2018) Tool condition monitoring using spectral subtraction algorithm and artificial intelligence methods in milling process. IJMERR 7(1):30–34Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Uekita M, Takaya Y (2017) Tool condition monitoring for form milling of large parts by combining spindle motor current and acoustic emission signals. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89(1):65–75Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lamraoui M, Thomas M, El Badaoui M (2014) Cyclostationarity approach for monitoring chatter and tool wear in high speed milling. Mech Syst Signal Process 44(1):177–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fu P, Hope A, King G (1998) Intelligent tool condition monitoring in milling operation.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Abellan-Nebot JV, Romero Subirón F (2010) A review of machining monitoring systems based on artificial intelligence process models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 47(1):237–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Elattar HM, Elminir HK, Riad A (2016) Prognostics: a literature review. Complex & Intelligent Systems 2(2):125–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chen Y, Jin Y, Jiri G (2018) Predicting tool wear with multi-sensor data using deep belief networks. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–10Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jiang Z, Gao D, Lu Y, Kong L, Shang Z (2019) Electrical energy consumption of CNC machine tools based on empirical modeling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 100(9-12):2255–2267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jia S, Yuan Q, Cai W, Lv J, Hu L (2019) Establishing prediction models for feeding power and material drilling power to support sustainable machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 100(9-12):2243–2253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goodfellow I, Bengio Y, Courville A (2016) Deep learning. The MIT Press,Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lei Y, Li N, Guo L, Li N, Yan T, Lin J (2018) Machinery health prognostics: a systematic review from data acquisition to RUL prediction. Mech Syst Signal Process 104:799–834Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thomas M (2011) Fiabilité, maintenance prédictive et vibration des machines. Presses de l’Université du Québec, MontréalGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aydin O, Guldamlasioglu S (2017) Using LSTM networks to predict engine condition on large scale data processing framework. In: 2017 4th International Conference on Electrical and Electronic Engineering (ICEEE), 8-10 April 2017. pp 281-285Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chollet F (2017) Keras (2015). Accessed 28 Oct 2018
  23. 23.
    Balan GC, Epureanu A (2008) The monitoring of the turning tool wear process using an artificial neural network. Part 1: the experimental set-up and experimental results. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 222(10):1241–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringÉcole de technologie supérieureMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations