Assessment of cutting force coefficient identification methods and force models for variable pitch and helix bull-nose tools

The mechanistic approach is commonly implemented to predict and optimise the cutting forces in milling processes to prevent tool breakages, reduce tool wear, reduce form error, and improve surface quality. To implement this method, the cutting force coefficients (CFCs), that characterise the mechanics of the process, must be calculated. This study compares the accuracy of the predicted cutting forces for variable pitch and helix bull-nose milling tools using a rapid testing (RT) optimisation-based mechanistic CFC identification method that only requires a single angular cut with increasing radial engagement to the traditional mechanistic approach that requires several straight cuts. Along with developing a hybrid technique that combines variation in feed rate and radial engagement. The traditional radial, tangential, and axial (RTA) force model is also compared with the frictional and normal rake face (UV) force model that is independent of the local tool rake and inclination angles which is a necessary for bull nose tools. The RT and the developed hybrid CFC identification method with the UV force model predicted the average F x , F y and F z cutting forces to within 7.1 %, 4.3 %, and 3.8 % error, respectively. These methods were slightly less accurate than the traditional method, however they have significant industrial benefits because they have can be used to identify CFCs with either a single cut, or from any tool-path with chip-load variation, respectively. The RTA force model predicted the average cutting forces similarly to the UV force model, however, the UV force model had lower errors using the rapid RT testing method at the extreme corners of the experimental design space.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
CIRP journal of manufacturing science and technology
Published
2024-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2024.09.010
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Advanced machining processes and optimization
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.28

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of cutting force coefficient identification methods and force models for variable pitch and helix bull-nose tools

Javier Dominguez-Caballero, Joseph Priest, Peace Onawumi, Zekai Murat Kılıç et al.
6 citations
CIRP journal of manufacturing science and technology
Advanced machining processes and optimization
1.28
article

Assessment of cutting force coefficient identification methods and force models for variable pitch and helix bull-nose tools

Javier Dominguez-Caballero, Joseph Priest, Peace Onawumi, Zekai Murat Kılıç, Sabino Ayvar-Soberanis, David Curtis
article en
6 citations

Abstract

The mechanistic approach is commonly implemented to predict and optimise the cutting forces in milling processes to prevent tool breakages, reduce tool wear, reduce form error, and improve surface quality. To implement this method, the cutting force coefficients (CFCs), that characterise the mechanics of the process, must be calculated. This study compares the accuracy of the predicted cutting forces for variable pitch and helix bull-nose milling tools using a rapid testing (RT) optimisation-based mechanistic CFC identification method that only requires a single angular cut with increasing radial engagement to the traditional mechanistic approach that requires several straight cuts. Along with developing a hybrid technique that combines variation in feed rate and radial engagement. The traditional radial, tangential, and axial (RTA) force model is also compared with the frictional and normal rake face (UV) force model that is independent of the local tool rake and inclination angles which is a necessary for bull nose tools. The RT and the developed hybrid CFC identification method with the UV force model predicted the average F x , F y and F z cutting forces to within 7.1 %, 4.3 %, and 3.8 % error, respectively. These methods were slightly less accurate than the traditional method, however they have significant industrial benefits because they have can be used to identify CFCs with either a single cut, or from any tool-path with chip-load variation, respectively. The RTA force model predicted the average cutting forces similarly to the UV force model, however, the UV force model had lower errors using the rapid RT testing method at the extreme corners of the experimental design space.

CIRP journal of manufacturing science and technologyVol. 55
University of Manchester (GB), Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre (GB)
High Value Manufacturing Catapult
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Advanced machining processes and optimization
1.28
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.