4.7 Article

The influence of friction models on finite element simulations of machining

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.07.001

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the analysis of orthogonal cutting process using finite element (FE) simulations, predictions are greatly influenced by two major factors; a) flow stress characteristics of work material at cutting regimes and b) friction characteristics mainly at the tool-chip interface. The uncertainty of work material flow stress upon FE simulations may be low when there is a constitutive model for work material that is obtained empirically from high-strain rate and temperature deformation tests. However, the difficulty arises when one needs to implement accurate friction models for cutting simulations using a particular FE formulation. In this study, an updated Lagrangian finite element formulation is used to simulate continuous chip formation process in orthogonal cutting of low carbon free-cutting steel. Experimentally measured stress distributions on the tool rake face are utilized in developing several different friction models. The effects of tool-chip interfacial friction models on the FE simulations are investigated. The comparison results depict that the friction modeling at the tool-chip interface has significant influence on the FE simulations of machining. Specifically, variable friction models that are developed from the experimentally measured normal and frictional stresses at the tool rake face resulted in most favorable predictions. Predictions presented in this work also justify that the FE simulation technique used for orthogonal cutting process can be an accurate and viable analysis as long as flow stress behavior of the work material is valid at the machining regimes and the friction characteristics at the tool-chip interface is modeled property. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available