Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Toward clean manufacturing: an analysis and validation of a modified Johnson–Cook material model for low and high-speed orthogonal machining of low-carbon aluminum alloy (Al 6061-T6)

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this research, sustainable machining of the aluminum alloy (Al 6061-T6) is considered. Aluminum is a durable and infinitely recyclable material as well as light in density, causing no environmental effects in comparison with other materials including steel or plastic. Currently, due to a lack of understanding and inefficient application of modern sustainable manufacturing tools and technologies, around 20% of the investment made in metal cutting tools was reported to have been wasted. The constitutive law describing the thermo-mechanical behavior of workpiece material significantly affects the success of any finite element modeling (FEM). Different values of Johnson–Cook (JC) material constants determined through different methods are found in the literature which consequently affects the predicted results. Current research used an inverse methodology to determine the JC material constants and compare them with published literature. The proposed JC material model was then verified through orthogonal machining of Al 6061-T6 alloy at different machining conditions. Cutting forces at high-speed machining were found to decrease remarkably due to adiabatic heating conditions and short contact time between the workpiece and tool material. The JC material constants determined through the current approach produced better predictions of the cutting forces at high-speed machining conditions suitable for sustainable manufacturing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data of research is being used for further extended research and can be made available in due course of time.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

A :

Initial yield stress (MPa)

B :

Hardening modulus (MPa)

t c :

Chip thickness

C :

Strain rate dependency coefficient

D :

Damage parameter

D 1 :

Initial failure strain

D 2 :

Exponential factor

D 3 :

Triaxiality factor

D 4 :

Strain rate factor

D 5 :

Temperature factor

F c :

Cutting force (N)

F t :

Thrust force (N)

f :

Feed rate (mm/rev)

m :

Thermal softening coefficient

n :

Work-hardening exponent

σpre :

Predicted equivalent stress (MPa) from simulation using the proposed model

T AB :

Instantaneous temperature (°C)

T room :

Room temperature (°C)

T melt :

Melting temperature (°C)

σ:

Equivalent flow stress (MPa)

\({\overline{\upvarepsilon } }_{f}\) :

Equivalent strain at failure

φ:

Shear angle (°)

ε:

Equivalent plastic strain

\(\dot{\upvarepsilon }\) :

Plastic strain rate (s−1)

\({\dot{\upvarepsilon }}_{0}\) :

Reference strain rate (s−1)

\(\mathcal{T}\) :

Friction stress (MPa)

\({\overline{\mathcal{T}} }_{\mathrm{max}}\) :

Maximum equivalent shear stress (MPa)

µ:

Average coefficient of friction

\(\Delta \overline{\upvarepsilon }\) :

Equivalent plastic strain increment

V :

Cutting speed (m/min)

W :

Width of cut (mm)

σcal :

Calculated equivalent stress (MPa) from [14

References

  1. Naik P, Naik A (2015) Determination of flow stress constants by Oxley‘s theory. Int J Latest Tech Eng Manag App Sci (IJLTEMAS) IV(X):110–116

  2. Guo YB (2003) An integral method to determine the mechanical behavior of materials in metal cutting. J Mater Process Technol 142(1):72–81

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Kalpakjian S, Schmid SR (2014) Manufacturing engineering and technology. Pearson, Upper Saddle River

  4. Shaw MC (2005) Metal cutting principles (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press, Oxford

  5. Jaffery SI, Driver N, Mativenga PT (2010) Analysis of process parameters in the micromachining of Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Proc 36th Int MATADOR Conf 2010-January:239–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84996-432-6_55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Groover M (2010) Fundamentals of modern manufacturing: materials, processes, and systems (4th edn). John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York

  7. Childs T (2000) Metal machining: theory and applications. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford

  8. Jaffery SI, Mativenga PT (2009) Study of the use of wear maps for assessing machining performance. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf 223(9):1097–1105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Khan MA, Jaffery SHI, Khan M (2023) Assessment of sustainability of machining Ti-6Al-4V under cryogenic condition using energy map approach. Eng Sci Technol an Int J 41:101357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Jomaa W, Songmene V, Bocher P (2014) Surface finish and residual stresses induced by orthogonal dry machining of AA7075-T651. Materials 7:1603–1624. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma7031603. (mdpi.com)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Arrazola PJ, Özel T, Umbrello D, Davies M, Jawahir IS (2013) Recent advances in modelling of metal machining processes. CIRP Ann Technol 62(2):695–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Khan MA, Jaffery SHI, Baqai AA, Khan M (2022) Comparative analysis of tool wear progression of dry and cryogenic turning of titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V under low, moderate and high tool wear conditions. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 121(1–2):1269–1287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Soo SL, Aspinwall DK, Dewes RC (2004) 3D FE modelling of the cutting of Inconel 718. J Mater Process Technol 150(1–2):116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.01.046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Daoud M, Jomaa W, Chatelain JF, Bouzid A (2015) A machining-based methodology to identify material constitutive law for finite element simulation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 77(9–12):2019–2033. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-6583-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wahab MA, Noda N-A, Bordas SP, Zhu W, Xuan HN, Vanegas-Useche LV (2015) Advances in finite element analysis for computational mechanics 2015. Adv Mech Eng 7(7):168781401559573. https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814015595739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nasr MNA, Ng EG, Elbestawi MA (2007) Modelling the effects of tool-edge radius on residual stresses when orthogonal cutting AISI 316L. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 47(2):401–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2006.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ulutan D, Lazoglu I, Dinc C (2009) Three-dimensional temperature predictions in machining processes using finite difference method. J Mater Process Technol 209(2):1111–1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2008.03.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Özel T, Zeren E (2006) A methodology to determine work material flow stress and tool-chip interfacial friction properties by using analysis of machining. J Manuf Sci Eng 128(1):119–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Daoud M, Chatelain J-F, Bouzid H (2014) On the effect of Johnson Cook material constants to simulate Al2024-T3 machining using finite element modeling. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2014 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. Volume 2A: Advanced Manufacturing. Montreal, Quebec, Canada. November 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2014-37170

  20. Manes A, Peroni L, Scapin M, Giglio M (2011) Analysis of strain rate behavior of an Al 6061 T6 alloy. Procedia Eng 10:3477–3482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.04.573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jia Z, Guan B, Zang Y, Wang Y, Mu L (2021) Modified Johnson-Cook model of aluminum alloy 6016-T6 sheets at low dynamic strain rates. Mater Sci Eng: A Elsevier, A 820:141565

  22. Niu L, Cao M, Liang Z, Han B, Zhang Q (2020) A modified Johnson-Cook model considering strain softening of A356 alloy. Elsevier, vol 789, p 139612

  23. Salguero J et al (2022) Research on conventional and high-speed machining cutting force of 7075-T6 aluminum alloy based on finite element modeling and simulation. 12:1395

  24. Philip A, Chakraborty K (2023) The Johnson Cook model for the machinability study. Mater Today: Proc Elsevier, Part 1:357–362

  25. Kececioglu D (1960) Shear-zone size, compressive stress, and shear strain in metal-cutting and their effects on mean shear-flow stress. J Eng Ind 82(1):79–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Okushima K, Hitomi K (1961) An analysis of the mechanism of orthogonal cutting and its application to discontinuous chip formation. J Eng Ind 83(4):545–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Stevenson R (1997) Study on the correlation of workpiece mechanical properties from compression and cutting tests. Mach Sci Technol 1(1):67–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rule WK (1997) A numerical scheme for extracting strength model coefficients from Taylor test data. Int J Impact Eng 19(9):797–810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Panov V (2006) Modelling of behaviour of metals at high strain rates. University of Cranfield, [PhD Thesis]

  30. Tounsi N, Vincenti J, Otho A, Elbestawi MA (2002) From the basic mechanics of orthogonal metal cutting toward the identification of the constitutive equation. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 42(12):1373–1383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Daoud M, Chatelain JF, Bouzid A (2017) Effect of rake angle-based Johnson-Cook material constants on the prediction of residual stresses and temperatures induced during Al2024-T3 machining process. Int J Mech Sci 122(March 2016):392–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.01.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Agmell, M, Ahadi A, Stahl JE (2014) Identification of plasticity constants from orthogonal cutting and inverse analysis. Mech Mater 77:43–51

  33. Özel T, Karpat Y (2007) Identification of constitutive material model parameters for high-strain rate metal cutting conditions using evolutionary computational algorithms. Mater Manuf Process 22(5):659–667. https://doi.org/10.1080/10426910701323631. (Taylor Fr)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Eisseler R, Drewle K, Grötzinger K, Mohring HC (2018) Using an inverse cutting simulation-based method to determine the johnson-cook material constants of heat-treated steel. Procedia CIRP Elsevier 77:26–29

  35. Ojal N, Cherukuri HP, Schmitz TL, Devlugt KT, Jaycox AW (2022) A combined experimental and numerical approach that eliminates the non-uniqueness associated with the Johnson-Cook parameters obtained using inverse methods. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 120(3–4):2373–2384. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00170-021-08640-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ning J, Nguyen V, Huang Y, …, H K (2018) “Inverse determination of Johnson–Cook model constants of ultra-fine-grained titanium based on chip formation model and iterative gradient search,” Int J Adv Manuf Technol Springer 99(5–8):1131–1140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2508-6

  37. Storchak M, Rupp P, Möhring H, S T (2019) Determination of Johnson-Cook constitutive parameters for cutting simulations. Metals. https://doi.org/10.3390/met9040473. (mdpi.com)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Bagci E (2011) 3-D numerical analysis of orthogonal cutting process via mesh-free method.pdf. Int J Phys Sci 6(6):1267–1282. https://doi.org/10.5897/IJPS10.600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Agmell M, Ahadi A, Stahl JE (2011) A fully coupled thermomechanical two-dimensional simulation model for orthogonal cutting: formulation and simulation. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf 225(10):1735–1745. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954405411407137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zouhar J, Piska M (2008) Modelling the orthogonal machining process using cutting tools with different geometry. MM Sci J 2008(03):49–52

  41. Hibbitt, Karlsson, Sorensen (2001) ABAQUS/explicit: user’s manual, vol 1. Karlsson & Sorenson Incorporated Publishing, Hibbitt

  42. Chen Y (2013) Prediction of subsurface damage during machining nickel-based superalloys. Clemson University, USA [PhD Thesis]

  43. Akram S, Jaffery SHI, Khan M, Fahad M, Mubashar A, Ali L (2018) Numerical and experimental investigation of Johnson-Cook material models for aluminum (AL 6061–t6) alloy using orthogonal machining approach. Adv Mech Eng 10(9):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/16878140187977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lee SH, Saito Y, Sakai T, Utsunomiya H (2002) Microstructures and mechanical properties of 6061 aluminum alloy processed by accumulative roll-bonding. Mater Sci Eng A 325(1–2):228–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01416-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rahmati B, Sarhan AAD, Sayuti M (2014) Morphology of surface generated by end milling AL6061-T6 using molybdenum disul fi de ( MoS 2) nanolubrication in end milling machining. J Clean Prod 66:685–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Warsi SS, Jaffery SHI, Ahmad R, Khan M, Agha MH, Ali L (2018) Development and analysis of energy consumption map for high-speed machining of Al 6061–T6 alloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 96(1–4):91–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sun S, Brandt M, Dargusch MS (2009) Characteristics of cutting forces and chip formation in machining of titanium alloys. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 49(7):561–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Jaffery SHI, Khan M, Ali L, Mativenga PT (2016) Statistical analysis of process parameters in micromachining of Ti-6Al-4V alloy. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf 230(6):1017–1034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Lesuer DR, Kay GJ, LeBlanc MM (2001) Modeling large-strain, high-rate deformation in metals. Third Bienn. Tri-Laboratory Eng. Conf. Model. Simul 3–5, Nov 3-5, California

  50. Abdi H (2007) The method of least squares. The University of Texas at Dallas, Encycl Meas Stat, Thousand Oaks

  51. Potdar YK, Zehnder AT (2003) Measurements and simulations of temperature and deformation fields in transient metal cutting. J Manuf Sci Eng 125(4):645. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1596571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Johnson GR, Cook WH (1983) A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. Proc 7th Int Symp Ballistics 21(1):541–547

    Google Scholar 

  53. Johnson GR, Cook WA (1985) Fracture characteristic of three metals subjected to various strains, strain rates, temperatures and pressures. Eng Fract Mech 21(1):31–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Akram S, Imran H, Khan M, Mubashar A, Warsi S, Riaz U (2016) A numerical investigation and experimental validation on chip morphology of aluminum alloy 6061 during orthogonal machining. Moratuwa Eng Res Conf (MERCon) 2016:331–336

    Google Scholar 

  55. Dandekar CR, Shin YC (2013) Multi-scale modeling to predict sub-surface damage applied to laser-assisted machining of a particulate reinforced metal matrix composite. J Mater Process Technol 213:153–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Shi J, Liu CR (2006) On predicting chip morphology and phase transformation in hard machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 27(7–8):645–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-004-2242-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Akram S, Jaffery SHI, Khan M, Mubashar A, Ali L (2015) A numerical investigation of effects of cutting velocity and feed rate on residual stresses in aluminum alloy Al-6061. Int J Mater Mech Manuf 3(1):26–30. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJMMM.2015.V3.160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Schwer LE (2009) Aluminum plate perforation : a comparative case study using Lagrange with erosion , multi-material ALE , and smooth particle hydrodynamics. In: 7th Eur LS-DYNA Conf 28 Schwer Engineering & Consulting Services, Windsor

  59. Saptaji K, Subbiah S (2016) Finite element study of the effect of substrate properties in micro-cutting thin workpiece materials. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng 114(1):12005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Maňková I, Kovac P, Kundrak J, Beňo J (2011) Finite element analysis of hardened steel cutting. J Prod Eng 14:7–10

    Google Scholar 

  61. Priyadarshini A, Pal SK, Samantaray AK (2012) Influence of the Johnson Cook material model parameters and friction models on simulation of orthogonal cutting process. J Mach Form Technol 4(1/2):59

    Google Scholar 

  62. Bourne KA, Kapoor SG, DeVor RE (2011) Study of the mechanics of the micro-groove cutting process. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2011 International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference. ASME 2011 International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, Volume 2. Corvallis, Oregon, USA. June 13–17. ASME, pp 339–348

  63. Akbar F, Mativenga PT, Sheikh MA (2010) An experimental and coupled thermo-mechanical finite element study of heat partition effects in machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 46(5–8):491–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-009-2117-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Agmell M, Ahadi A, Ståhl JE (2011) A numerical and experimental investigation of the deformation zones and the corresponding cutting forces in orthogonal cutting. Adv Mater Res 223:152–161. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.223.152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Movahhedy MR, Gadala MS, Altintas Y (2000) Simulation of chip formation in orthogonal metal cutting process: an ale finite element approach. Mach Sci Technol 4(1):15–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10940340008945698. (University of British Columbia)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Xie LJ, Schmidt J, Schmidt C, Biesinger F (2005) 2D FEM estimate of tool wear in turning operation. Wear 258(10):1479–1490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2004.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Arrazola PJ, Özel T (2008) Numerical modelling of 3D hard turning using arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian finite element method. Mech Eng 3(3):238–249. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMMM.2008.020907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Oxley PLB (1989) The mechanics of machining: an analytical approach to assesing machinability. Ellis Horwood, Ltd

  69. Ozel T, Zeren E (2004) Determination of work material flow stress and friction for FEA of machining using orthogonal cutting tests. J Mater Process Technol 153:1019–1025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Xiong Y, Wang W, Jiang R, Lin K (2017) A study on cutting force of machining In Situ TiB2 particle-reinforced 7050Al alloy matrix composites. Metals 7(6):197

  71. Li B, Wang X, Hu Y, Li C (2011) Analytical prediction of cutting forces in orthogonal cutting using unequal division shear-zone model. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 54(5):431–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Arrazola PJ, Meslin F, Hamann JC, Le Maître L (2002) F.E.M. Abaqus/Explicit 6.1. Abaqus Users’ Conference, Newport-R.I.-EEUU, p 2730

  73. Umbrello D (2008) Finite element simulation of conventional and high speed machining of Ti6Al4V alloy. J Mater Process Technol 196(1–3):79–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.05.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Xie JQ, Bayoumi AE, Zbib HM (1996) A study on shear banding in chip formation of orthogonal machining. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 36(7):835–847

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Zhao Y, Sun J, Li J, Yan Y, Wang P (2017) A comparative study on Johnson-Cook and modified Johnson-Cook constitutive material model to predict the dynamic behavior laser additive manufacturing FeCr alloy. J Alloys Compd 723:179–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Wu H, To S (2015) Serrated chip formation and their adiabatic analysis by using the constitutive model of titanium alloy in high speed cutting. J Alloys Compd 629:368–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2014.12.230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Zhang Y, Outeiro JC, Mabrouki T (2015) On the selection of Johnson-Cook constitutive model parameters for Ti-6Al-4V using three types of numerical models of orthogonal cutting. Procedia CIRP 31:112–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.03.052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Wang B, Liu Z (2015) Simulation modelling practice and theory shear localization sensitivity analysis for Johnson – Cook constitutive parameters on serrated chips in high speed machining of Ti6Al4V. Simul Model Pract Theory 55:63–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2015.03.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Miller SJ (2006) The method of least squares. Department of Mathematics and Statistics Williams College, Williamstown

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering (SMME), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Sector H-12, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan

    Sohail Akram, Syed Husain Imran Jaffery & Muhammad Ali Khan

  2. Department of Computer Science, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, USA

    Zahid Anwar

  3. Mechanical Engineering Department, Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University, 31952, Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia

    Mushtaq Khan

  4. Department of Mechanical Engineering (CEME), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Sector H-12, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan

    Muhammad Ali Khan

Authors
  1. Sohail Akram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Syed Husain Imran Jaffery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zahid Anwar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mushtaq Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Muhammad Ali Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SA: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, and writing—original draft. SHIJ: project administration, resources, supervision, validation, visualization, and writing—review and editing. ZA: conceptualization, doe, visualization, and writing—review and editing. MK: project support, facility/ resources, and results interpretation and experimental analysis. MAK: methodology, formal analysis, validation, visualization, and writing—review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Ali Khan.

Ethics declarations

Consent to participate

There was no human participant involved during the conduct of this research.

Consent for publication

All authors consented to submit the outcome of this research for publication in the journal.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

We confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akram, S., Jaffery, S.H.I., Anwar, Z. et al. Toward clean manufacturing: an analysis and validation of a modified Johnson–Cook material model for low and high-speed orthogonal machining of low-carbon aluminum alloy (Al 6061-T6). Int J Adv Manuf Technol 129, 2523–2536 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-12367-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-12367-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation