Tool Wear and Tool Life
Tool Wear and Tool Life
Structure
3.1
3.2
Introduction
Objectives
3.3 3.4
3.5
Tool Materials
3.5.1 3.5.2 3.5.3 3.5.4 3.5.5 3.5.6
Carbon Tool Steels High Speed Steels Cemented Carbides Coated Carbides Ceramic Tool Materials Polycrystalline Diamonds
3.1 INTRODUCTION
During removal of material from the workpiece (in the form of chips) using a cutting tool, the tool undergoes gradual wear. The extent of the wear of the tool depends upon the relative hardness of tool and work material, and the cutting conditions. In addition, magnitude of tool wear strongly depends upon the time of cut. Time-wear relationships for the cutting tools can be expressed in terms of the empirical equations (empirical equations are usually derived based on the analysis of the experimental results). Such equations help in the planning of cutting operations. How well a work material can be machined by the given tool, under the specified machining conditions, has been qualitatively defined in terms of machinability. Many attempts have been made with some success by researchers to express the machinability in terms of quantifiable parameters e.g., tool life. Some of them are discussed in this unit. The tool life is greatly influenced by the cutting conditions, tool geometry, cutting fluid, work material, tool material, etc. Various types of tool materials and their properties have also been discussed in this unit.
Objectives
After studying this unit, you should be able to understand mechanisms of tool wear, and change of nature of tool wear with time, 53
different types of wear, namely, flank wear and crater wear, various criteria to evaluate tool wear, equations proposed to evaluate tool life, definition of machinability and how to evaluate machinability, and different types of tool materials and their properties.
(ii)
A tool can also be said to have failed if the surface finish is poorer, taper is larger, or power required is more than the designed one. Tool failure by the process of gradual wear is more important, hence it is discussed here in detail.
54
mm/rev. Growth of flank wear with time has been investigated in depth. It has been found that flank wear and time relationship follows a curve which can be divided in three parts hence known as three stage flank wear curve (Figure 3.2(a)). Initial part is rapid growth region (break in region), second one is steady state region (temperature insensitive), and third one is the region of catastrophe failure (temperature sensitive region).
Figure 3.1 : Types of Tool Failure : (a) Failure Due to Thermal Stresses; (b) Failure Due to Mechanical Impact; (c) Gradual Microscopic Wear; (d) Typical Wear Patterns in a Cutting Tool; (e) Photograph of Flank Wear; and (f) Photograph of Built Up Edge
Both flank and crater wear occur simultaneously when machining at low or moderate cutting speed. Flank wear is characterised by the wear land (or height) hf of wear band. Face wear or crater wear is characterised mainly by the depth c, width l, distance f, and radius of curvature R of the crater (Figure 3.2(b)). Flank wear land formation is not always uniform along the side and cutting edge of the tool which depends on cutting conditions, and properties of the material being machined. Chipping of the tool involves removal of relatively large discrete particles from the tool. Tools subjected to discontinuous cutting conditions are particularly prone to chipping. BUE formation also has a tendency to promote tool chipping. Whenever a BUE breaks away it takes along with it a part of the tool material, to which it was adhered. This leaves a chipped cutting edge. The cutting operation is discontinued whenever wear growth is excessive, the tool profile is lost, or the cutting force and power requirement have excessively increased. In case of heavy cuts, notch formation on the tool takes place as shown in Figure 3.1(e). A quantity setting the limit of the permissible value of wear is known as criterion of wear which differs from material to material. The criterion of wear is dependent on cutting speed because the predominant wear may be crater if cutting speed is increased. Failure by crater takes place when the index, hk, reaches 0.4 value before the flank wear limit of hf = 1 mm for carbide tools is attained. Its value for HSS is 0.6. The index hk is given by
55
hk =
c (l/ 2) + f
. . . (3.1)
The nature of variation of the parameters in Eq. (3.1) is shown in Figure 3.2(c).
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 3.2 : (a) Three-stage Flank Wear Curve; (b) Various Elements of Flank Wear and Crater Wear; and (c) Variation of Various Elements of Crater Wear with Time
During cutting, both face and flank wear increase with time, reducing the width 'f' of the land behind the cutting edge. When the crater becomes so wide that it reaches the cutting edge, the latter crumbles and tool failure occurs. Before the tool can cut again, it must be resharpened by grinding away definite layers of metal on the face and flank to impart the appropriate geometric shape to the tool point. It has been seen that the flank of the cutting tool undergoes wear progressively. The amount of material lost from the cutting edge depends on the normal pressure between the tool and work, the sliding speed and sliding distance (or machining time). As such, when the tool is made to traverse along the workpiece (say, a shaft being turned on lathe), the surface generated is not parallel to the axis of the job because flank wear of the tool keeps increasing with time (Figure 3.2(a)) hence machined surface diameter keeps increasing. Hence, a tapered surface is produced as shown in Figure 3.3. Thus, uncontrolled flank wear may result into serious dimensional inaccuracy of the workpiece. This can be minimised by regular regrinding the tool. Other processes (Broaching, Milling, Drilling, etc.) may also experience similar problems. In some cases, the size of the workpiece may be large enough requiring regrinding of the tool before the completion of a single pass of machining. In such instances, it is recommended to select a superior quality tool with very small wear rate. Or the machining conditions (feed, cutting speed, and depth of cut) should be selected such that one full pass of cutting is completed, before the tool life is over. The selection of the
56
tool, among other things, depends upon the relative hardness of the tool and work material.
For machining of jobs where high degree of dimensional accuracy is desired, tools which have very small wear rate and consequently high useful life span should be employed. As a thumb rule, the hardness of the cutting tool material should be about 150 % more than the chip material hardness under the cutting conditions. Flank wear causes excessive rubbing between the work and tool. Therefore, large forces and temperature are generated which have to be borne by the tool and its clamp or fixture. Thus, with increased flank wear, the chances of m/c tool chatter (large amplitude vibration that reduces tool life, spoils surface finish of the component, and yields poor dimensional tolerances) and its instability are increased. Excessive rubbing between the tool and workpiece may also result into burning of the tool edge and failure. High temperature generated due to excessive rubbing may also result into diffusion wear of the tool, which consequently weakens the tool progressively. It is a time and temperature dependent phenomenon which is also affected by the bonding affinity of the pair and the degree of atomic agitation. After a certain temperature level, chemical wear may also occur. Thus, under above cited conditions the physical and chemical stability of the tool material deteriorates rapidly. Flank wear has an adverse effect on surface quality of the machined part. The surface roughness depends upon the extent of flank wear. Sometimes due to tool chatter, chatter marks, and scratches are produced on the machined surface resulting into poor surface quality. Further, the machined parts become weak in fatigue because of surface scratches. Temperature also influences quality of the surface generated. The actual value of surface roughness produced shall depend upon several factors like cutting speed, material being cut, tool material, depth of cut, feed rate and rigidity of the machine tool and fixture. More the flank wear, poorer will be the surface finish. Therefore, regrinding of the tool after proper interval is essential.
However, the tool failure criterion be used depends upon the requirements of the component being produced. For example, in roughing operations, a specified % increase in cutting force or power requirements over the initial value may be taken as failure criteria while in finishing operations, deterioration in surface finish and dimensional accuracy may be taken as failure criteria. However, the tool should not be permitted to undergo complete failure in roughing operations to avoid the possible damage to the component and/or the total loss of the cutting tool. F. W. Taylor did exhaustive metal cutting experiments for many years, and based on the experimental observations he proposed a tool life equation (Taylors tool life equation) : VT n = Ct where, V is cutting speed, T is tool life (minutes), n is an exponent for the conditions tested, and Ct is a Taylors constant for the unaccounted variables. Ct represents cutting speed for one minute as tool life. However, the Taylors tool life relationship (Eq. (3.2)) does not account for the effects of feed (f), depth of cut (d), and tool geometry (for example, rake angle, ). These variables also influence the tool life, however, the most dominating parameter is cutting speed. After taking logarithm on both the sides of Eq. (3.2), it can be written as Log V + n log T = log Ct . . . It becomes a straight line on the log-log scale (Figure 3.4(a)). Figure 3.4(b) shows that the values of n and Ct are different for different tool materials. In view of the weaknesses of the Eq. (3.2), Gilbert proposed a modified tool-life equation (Eq. (3.4)) VT f
n n1
. . . (3.2)
. . . (3.3)
n2
=C
. . . (3.4)
where, n, n1, n2 are constants depending upon the tool material. Constant C depends on the tool-work material combination and tool geometry. The values of these constants are less than one (vary between 0.10 to 0.40 for HSS tools) while that of C is comparatively very large (say, greater than + 100). Machinability is the term frequently used but seldom well defined because it is qualitative in nature. Tool life refers to the cutting tool while machinability is mainly concerned with the workpiece, however, tool and work combination influence both. The tool life is often taken as a yardstick for comparing the machinability of different work materials. Machinability can be defined as the ease with which a given material can be worked with a specified cutting tool. Machinability, depends on the cutting conditions and properties of work material (for example, mechanical, metallurgical physical and chemical properties). Machinability can be judged by tool life, cutting forces, surface finish, tool temperature, etc. A material is said to have good machinability if tool wear is low (or tool life is high), surface finish produced is good, cutting forces or power requirements are low, etc.
58
Figure 3.4 : (a) Relationship between Tool Life and Cutting Speed on Log-log Scale; (b) Tool Life and Cutting Speed Relationship for Different Tool Materials; and (c) Discontinuous Time and Cutting Speed Relationship
(a)
(b)
Figure 3.5 : (a) Effect of Rake Angle on Tool Life; and (b) Effect of Clearance Angle on Tool Life
Larger clearance angle (relief angle) results in reduced rubbing between the tool and work, hence gives longer tool life (Figure 3.5(b)). Very large clearance angle would, however, weaken the tool hence reduce its life.
. . . (3.5)
60
hardness at cutting temperature is more important because the cutting is to be done at that temperature. Thus, it is important that for efficient cutting, the tool material must retain its hardness at elevated cutting temperature. The change in tool material hardness with temperature and other prerequisites for the materials to be used for tool production are discussed in detail in the following section.
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii) Friction : This factor is important from tool wear as well as surface finish point of view. Coefficient of friction () between the tool and the chip should be as low as possible in the operating range of speed and feed. Low value of will reduce the power requirement for cutting. (viii) Cost : Selected tool material should be cheap enough to be economical as compared to the existing tool material. (ix) Ease of Fabrication : It should be possible to produce different shaped tools easily.
61
There is no single tool material which can be regarded as the best tool material with respect to the above considerations. Relative importance of the above factors will depend upon the nature of the product being machined (precision and cost), volume of production, type of machining operation (intermittent or continuous, roughing or finishing, high or low speed), etc. The common types of tool materials are as follows : (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) Carbon tool steels, Medium alloy steels, High speed steels, Cast alloy steels, Cemented carbides, Coated cemented carbides,
62
proper geometry of cutting tool and appropriate cutting conditions, carbide tipped tools can operate at speeds as high as 2700 m/min while machining steels, and 5000 m/min during machining aluminium. Cemented carbides comprise Tungsten Carbide powder in cobalt matrix. These are manufactured by sintering process. To improve upon the cutting ability of these tools, certain percentage of Titanium or Tantalum is also added. Cemented carbide tools are used to machine hardened (upto 67 RC) and difficult to machine steels. It is used for the production of single-point tools, face milling cutters, 3 twist drills, reamers, etc. Cemented carbides have high density (9.5 to 15.1 g/cm ), high hardness, and high wear resistance at high temperature. The hardness of cemented carbide is increased by increasing the percentage of carbides. But increased hardness decreases its ductility and increases brittleness into it. Such tools are incapable of withstanding high bending and shear loads, especially while executing intermittent cuts. During machining of C.I. where loose segmental (fractured) chips are obtained and a pulsating impact load is inflicted near the cutting edge, more ductile tool materials (say, straight tungsten cemented carbide comprising WC + Co) should be employed. The ductility of cemented carbides depends upon their grain size and the cobalt content. For a constant grain size, ductility improves with cobalt content. Tips (oval, round, or prismatic) are secured by various means to the shank (Figure 3.7).
63
Determine approximate tool life (no calculation is allowed) for cutting speed of 70 m/min if 0.75 mm flank wear is the tool failure criterion. Determine the tool life equation if the tool failure criterion is 0.75 mm flank wear land width.
(a)
Plot time vs. flank wear curves for two different cutting speeds using the data given in the table. Draw a horizontal line from point A (at A, flank wear = 0.75 mm ) which cuts V-T curves at points B and D. Divide BD into 3 equal parts, and mark point C such that DC = 2 BC. From point C, draw a vertical line which cuts abscissa at T = 12.75 min. Thus, T 12.75 min at V = 70 m/min.
64
(b)
Using Taylors tool life equation (TV = C) and the data given in the table, following two equations can be written (for flank wear = 0.75 mm, T1 9.5 min at V1 = 75 m/min and T2 18 min at V2 = 60 m/min obtained from the curves). 9.5 (75) = C1
18.0 (60) = C1
n n
. . . (A)
9.5 75 =1 18.0 60
Solve this equation to get n = 2.864 Substituting the value of n in Eq. (A), it will yield C1 = 2.2 10 6
SAQ 1
(a) A precision component is being turned on a lathe for which control of dimensions is most important. Which tool failure criterion will you recommend? (i) (ii) (iii) (b) Crater wear, flank wear, none of these.
18 : 4 : 1 HSS consists of (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 18% W, 4% Cr, 1% V, 18% W, 4% Cr, 1% V, 5% Co, 18% Mo, 4% W, 1% Cr, none of these.
(c)
Tool life exponent n of HSS tool as compared to carbon tool steel while machining MS under the same conditions will be (i) (ii) (iii) higher, lower, same.
(d)
At higher cutting speed, tool life (in minutes) will be (i) (ii) higher, lower, 65
(iii) (e)
same.
A cutting tool fails suddenly during cutting. It is due to (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Flank wear, crater wear, chipping, all of these.
(f)
In adhesion wear, hard particles erode the material from the soft surface (i) (ii) True, False.
(g)
A carbide tipped tool is provided with +ve rake angle so that it can resist shock loads in a better way. (i) (ii) True, False.
(h)
While machining C.I. using HSS tool, the tool life is most affected by (i) (ii) (iii) Cutting speed, feed rate, depth of cut.
(i)
Flank wear occurs mainly on (i) (ii) (iii) Rake face, cutting edge, nose part and relief edge.
(j)
The characteristic that enables one material to cut another is (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) toughness, ductility, resilience, hardness.
(k)
For intermittent cutting, the tool material should have high (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) wear resistance, hardness, toughness, none of these.
(l)
In intermittent cutting, the actual cutting time and total cutting time are (i) (ii) (iii) same, different, no relation between the two.
(m)
A tool is being used for finish turning, and its life is over. It can be reused for rough turning (i) (ii) after regrinding, without regrinding, cannot be reused at all.
66
(iii)
(n)
Machinability is the characteristic of (i) (ii) (iii) tool material, work material, none of these.
3.6 SUMMARY
In this unit, five different modes of tool failure have been discussed. The most important one, i.e. gradual wear resulting into flank wear and crater wear have been discussed in depth. The maximum permissible value of flank wear land width (hf) and crater wear index value (hk) have been discussed. Effect of tool wear on dimensional accuracy, stability and surface finish have also been mentioned. Tool life equation suggested by Taylor, its weaknesses and the modified equation proposed by Gilbert have been given. The inability in defining machinability and the parameters affecting tool life have been elaborated. Finally, the prerequisites for any material to be used as tool material, and different types of tool materials have also been discussed.
Tool Life
Machinability
3.8 EXERCISES
Q 1. Q 2. Q 3. Q 4. Q 5. Q 6. Write an equation that can express the effects of cutting speed, feed and depth of cut on tool life. Comment on their relative effects on tool-life. Why hot hardness of a cutting tool material is an important property? Explain. Differentiate between abrasion wear and adhesion wear. What is cermet? Is it better in comparison to its competitive tool material cemented carbide? Explain the role of cutting fluid in machining and discuss its effect on tool life. Find the constants of Taylor's tool life equation if tool life in turning a job of certain material of 120 mm dia. at 150 RPM is 7.5 min and that in turning the same material job of 85 mm dia at 50 RPM is 75 min. Name different mechanisms of tool wear, and write the conditions under which each one will be dominant. In a tool wear test, the tool life obtained was 30 min and 1.5 min while cutting at 25 m /min and 70 m/min, respectively. Calculate the values of exponent n and constant C in Taylor's tool life equation. (Ans. n = 0.344, C = 80.43 m/min) Q 9. Calculate the cutting speed at which the tool would work satisfactorily for 3 hours. Following data is available for the tool work combination : Tool life = 2 hours, V = 45m/min, n = 0.2 (Ans : V = 4 m/min)
Q 7. Q 8.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Armarego, E. J. A. and Brown, R. H. (1969), The Machining of Metals, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Kalpakjian, S. (1989), Manufacturing Engineering and Technology, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., New York. Lal, G. K. (1998), Machining Science, New Age Int. Publishers, New Delhi. Pandey, P. C. and Sing, C. K. (1998), Production Engineering Science, Standard Publishers Distributors, Delhi. Rao, P. N. (2000), Manufacturing Technology : Metal Cutting and Machine Tools, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. Ltd., New Delhi. Shaw, M. C. (1984), Metal Cutting Principles, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
68