General Theory and Its Application in the High-Speed Milling of Aluminum

  • T. Raj Aggarwal
Part of the Chapman and Hall Advanced Industrial Technology Series book series (AITS)


For the metalworking industry to remain profitable, it must continually reduce its cost of manufacturing parts. One important segment of this economic procedure has been the costs involved in removing unwanted material from the workpiece. For example, the airplane part shown in Fig. 6.1 originally weighed 6000 lb (2725 kg) and is machined down to 435 lb (197 kg) after many hours on large, expensive machine tools.


Machine Tool Tool Life Spindle Speed Axial Depth Radial Depth 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Salomon, C., “Process for the Machining of Metals or Similar Acting Materials When Being Worked by Cutting Tools,” German patent No. 523594, April 1931.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    High-Speed Machining,“ Special Report No. 710, American Machinist, March 1979.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Merchant, M. E., “10 Years Ahead… What’s in It for Metalworking?” Society of Automotive Engineers, National Aeronautic Meeting, 1959.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    King, R. I. and J. G. McDonald, (Lockheed), “Production Design Implications of New High-Speed Milling Techniques,” Journal of Engineering for Industry, ASME, November 1976, p. 1170.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Von Turkovich, B. F., “Influence of Very High Cutting Speed on Chip Formation Mechanics,” 7th North American Metalworking Research Conference Proceedings, 1979, SME Transactions.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aggarwal, T. R., “Research in Practical Aspects of High-Speed Milling of Aluminum,” SME Paper No. MR82–262, Society of Manufacturing Engineers, Detroit, 1982.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McGee, J., et al., “Manufacturing Methods for High Speed Machining of Aluminum,” Final Technical Report, Vought Corporation Contract No. DAAK-40–76-C1329, submitted to U.S. Army Missile Research and Development Command, February 1, 1978.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stelson, T. S., “Turning Tests on Aluminum and Titanium,” AMRP Report # SRD-81–062, TRW Inc. Contract No. F33615–79-C-5119, submitted to the Air Force Systems Command, 17 August 1981.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schroeder, T. A. and S. Hague, “Conventional to High Speed Turning,” G. E. Carboloy Systems Department AMRP Report # SRD-81–062, submitted to the Air Force Systems Command, 17 August 1981.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Truncale, J. F. and T. C. Winiecki, “High Speed Machining, Expanded Production Machinability Data for Aerospace Alloys,” AMRP Report # SRD-81–086, General Dynamics Convair Div. Contract F33615–80-C-5057, submitted to the Air Force Systems Command, October 20, 1981.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kegg, R. L. and W. J. Zdeblick, “High Speed Milling—Research vs. Todaÿ s Practices,” Proceedings of 20th Annual Meeting and Technical Conference, Numerical Control Society, Glenview, Ill., 1983.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shigley, J. E., Mechanical Engineering Design, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 157–191.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tlusty, J. and P. MacNeil, “Dynamics of Cutting Forces in End Milling,” Annals of CIRP, Vol. 24/1/1975. pp. 21–25.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Criger, G. L. (General Dynamics Convair Div.), “High Speed Machining in Production,” SAMPE Quarterly, April 1981, pp. 12–18.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman and Hall 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Raj Aggarwal
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Metcut Research Associates, Inc.USA
  2. 2.Cincinnati Milacron Industries, Inc.USA

Personalised recommendations