A Finite Element Study of Chip Formation Process in Orthogonal Machining

Abstract

This paper examines the plane strain 2D Finite Element (FE) modeling of segmented, as well as continuous chip formation while machining AISI 4340 with a negative rake carbide tool. The main objective is to simulate both the continuous and segmented chips from the same FE model based on FE code ABAQUS/Explicit. Both the adiabatic and coupled temperature displacement analysis has been performed to simulate the right kind of chip formation. It is observed that adiabatic hypothesis plays a critical role in the simulation of segmented chip formation based on adiabatic shearing. The numerical results dealing with distribution of stress, strain and temperature for segmented and continuous chip formations were compared and found to vary considerably from each other. The simulation results were also compared with other published results; thus validating the developed model.

Cutting forces and crater wear prediction in orthogonal cutting using two approaches of finite element modeling

“…Therefore, steady simulation process cannot predict tool wear matches the experiments. Table 13 showed that the error percentages between simulated wear and experiments were (4.6%‐10%), which is accepted compared to recent researches such as Eliaz et al, 2020 13 who could achieve 12.5% minimum tool wear error percentage.…”

“…Priyadarshini et al 13 have mentioned that there are three FEM approaches for defining the motion of material points through the mesh grid during simulation running time. These approaches are LAG, EUL, and ALE approach.…”

Numerical Analysis Conducted During the Study on the Impact of Tool-Chip Contact Time on the Shear Angle in Orthogonal Machining

“…The cutting speed has been maintained constant and only the rpm is varying in the experiments. Due to the constant cutting speed and only varying rpm, for ease of analysis the workpiece is considered to be rectangular and the rpm is converted to linear speed to machine the rectan-gular surface, which has been referred from existing literature [12]. Care has been taken to scale in proportion, not to affect the results and the speed of simulations.…”

“…The constants in the equation 1 represent: A = Yield stress corresponding to a 0.2 offset point. ference rule and mechanical response by explicit central-difference rule [6,12,23].…”

“…2. In elastic heat fraction (0.9, this is typically used in the simulation of high-speed manufacturing processes involving large amounts of inelastic strain, Where the heating of the material caused by its deformation significantly influences temperature-dependent material properties [6,12]).…”