Study of the Influence of Speed and Feed on

the Drilling Thrust Force and Torque

ABSTRACT
Large number holes are drilled for the manufacturing of aircraft components, parts, joints,
structures etc. The process of drilling involves complex interactions and undergoes major changes
such as material damage, heat generation, plasticity, contacts and friction. It is very difficult to
achieve consistent performance in drilling and there is a great demand for producing holes
economically. Some of the widespread problems in drilling are excessive tool wear, work-piece
deformation, high temperature, poor surface finish, burr, delamination etc. These problems associated
with drilling operation are related to the force generated during the machining operation. Prediction of
cutting forces for any set of cutting parameters is essential for optimal design and manufacturing of
products. Prediction of cutting forces are also the key to design and evaluation of cutting tools and
fixtures.

The main goal of this thesis is to build a finite element method (FEM) model of drilling process,
which can predict the thrust force and torque. The model simulates tool-work piece interaction of
titanium alloy drilling and the complicated material deformation process, and provide insight into the
underlying mechanics of material behavior especially at high strain and strain rate regimes. A thermo-
mechanically coupled FEM model which incorporates accurate drilling tool geometry to predict
cutting forces for a set of cutting parameters is established. The model could be employed for accurate
and reliable simulation of drilling process which will enable good predictions of strain and stress
distributions; cutting forces and torque by integrating complex drill geometry and process parameters.

Using parametric curves and surfaces functions of CAD system, geometrical model of twist drill of
diameter 5mm and 10mm is modeled and used in the FEA simulation. Drilling experiments of
titanium alloy Ti6Al4V are also conducted. Taking the speed and feed as the process variables, a set of
simulation and experimental cutting forces are obtained and compared. Good agreement was found
between the experimental and FEM results. The highest difference between the FEM prediction and
experiment results for thrust force was 10% and for the torque was 18%. Factors such as material
model, mesh model, contact properties such as friction, boundary conditions are the cause of the
difference for the experimental and FEM results and are the topic of continuous research. From the
study it is concluded that the thrust force and torque of drilling process rises with the feed rate. The
lower spindle speed resulted in the greater amount of thrust. Feed rates have greater influence on the
thrust force than the spindle speed. The combination of greater feed rate and lower spindle speed

ii
results in the maximum amount of thrust. However, combination of greater feed rate and spindle
speed resulted in maximum amount of torque.

Keywords: Finite element analysis; Titanium alloy; Drilling; Process Parameters; Cutting forces

Contents

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background.........................................................................................................................................1
1.2 Drill Bit Parameters............................................................................................................................3
1.3 Drilling................................................................................................................................................5
1.4 Titanium Alloys...................................................................................................................................7
1.5 FEM Method.......................................................................................................................................8
1.6 Objective and Scope of the Thesis......................................................................................................9
Chapter 2 DRILLING OF TITANIUM ALLOYS..................................................................................11
2.1 Mechanics of Metal Cutting..............................................................................................................11
2.3 Drilling Process Analysis..................................................................................................................18
2.4 Machinability of Titanium Alloys.....................................................................................................19
2.5 Tool Wear and Surface Integrity in Drilling Process........................................................................22
Chapter 3 FEM MODEL OF DRILLING..............................................................................................24
3.1 Simulating Drilling Processes with DEFORM-3D..........................................................................24
3.2 Parametric Modeling of Twist Drill..................................................................................................24
3.3 Defining Mesh Type..........................................................................................................................31
3.4 Assigning Material and Boundary Condition...................................................................................33
3.5 Contact..............................................................................................................................................34
3.6 Movement and Simulation Controls.................................................................................................35
Chapter 4 DRILLING SETUP AND EXPERIMENTS..........................................................................39
4.2 Experiment Setup..............................................................................................................................39
4.3 Tools and Work piece........................................................................................................................41
4.4 Experimental Analysis......................................................................................................................47
Chapter 5 EXPERIMENTAL AND SIMULATION RESULTS............................................................52
5.1 Experimental Results........................................................................................................................52
5.2 Effect of Feed....................................................................................................................................55
5.3 Effect of Spindle Speed.....................................................................................................................55
5.4 Radial Distribution of Cutting Forces...............................................................................................56
5.5 FEM Results......................................................................................................................................58
5.6 Comparison of FEA and Experimental Results................................................................................63
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION.................................................................67
6.1 Conclusion.........................................................................................................................................67
6.2 Recommendation..............................................................................................................................68
References...............................................................................................................................................69

iv
 List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Geometry of standard two flute twist drill..............................................................................5

Figure 1.2 Drilling fixture.........................................................................................................................7
Figure 2.1 Orthogonal and oblique cutting model..................................................................................11
Figure 2.2 Model of oblique cutting (Usui et al)....................................................................................12
Figure 2.3 Close-up of a cutting action of different cutting elements along the the single cutting edge
of a twist drill..........................................................................................................................................15
Figure 2.4 Elementary cutting section....................................................................................................16
Figure 2.5 Conversion of Local Forces (FH, FV, FT) in oblique cutting to global force components
(Ftang, Fthrust, Frad).......................................................................................................................................17
Figure 2.6 (a) Thrust force Fz and torque Tc acting on the tool, b) Cutting speed VC, (c) Feed f...........18
Figure 3.1 Flute cross-section.................................................................................................................27
Figure 3.2 Flute profile...........................................................................................................................29
Figure 3.3 Drill flute body......................................................................................................................29
Figure 3.4 Skew distance (s)...................................................................................................................30
Figure 3.5 Cone profile...........................................................................................................................30
Figure 3.6 Twist drill bit..........................................................................................................................31
Figure 3.7 Five-axis CNC milling machine (常州籍床-TH5660A)......................................................39
Figure 3.8 Work holding fixture.............................................................................................................40
Figure 3.9 Fixed-plate dynamometer......................................................................................................40
Figure 3.10 Data acquisition setup.........................................................................................................41
Figure 3.11 Work piece and tools...........................................................................................................41
Figure 3.12 Tools.....................................................................................................................................43
Figure 3.13 Hole configuration on work piece.......................................................................................44
Figure 3.14 Three stages of drilling - 1, 2 and 3.....................................................................................48
Figure 3.15 Experimental thrust force and torque sample.....................................................................49
Figure 3.16Tool profile t1........................................................................................................................49
Figure 3.17Tool profile t2........................................................................................................................47
Figure 3.18Tool profile t3........................................................................................................................54
Figure 3.19 Experimental thrust force and torque sample tool-t314-2.......................................................50
Figure 4.1 Mesh setup.............................................................................................................................32
Figure 4.2 Boundary condition...............................................................................................................33
Figure 4.3 Material library......................................................................................................................34
Figure 4.4 Contact...................................................................................................................................35
Figure 4.5 Movement and simulation control.........................................................................................36
Figure 4.6 Database generation...............................................................................................................36
Figure 5.1 Radial distribution of thrust force along the cutting lip of t1................................................56
Figure 5.2 Radial distribution of thrust force along the cutting lip of t2................................................57
Figure 5.3 Radial distribution of thrust force along the cutting lip of t3................................................57
Figure 5.4 Tool and work pieceFEM mesh (time = 0 sec).....................................................................58
Figure 5.5 FEM simulation model in progress (time = 0.549 sec).........................................................59
Figure 5.6 Chip mesh of deformed work piece generated by DEFORM. (2.937 sec)...........................59
Figure 5.7 Damage..................................................................................................................................60
Figure 5.8 Strain......................................................................................................................................60
Figure 5.9 Strain rate...............................................................................................................................61
Figure 5.10 Principal stress.....................................................................................................................61
Figure 5.11 Temperature.........................................................................................................................62
Figure 5.12 FEM Thrust force plot.........................................................................................................63
Figure 5.13 FEM Torque plot.................................................................................................................63
Figure 5.14 Effect of spindle speed on thrust force (Tool t2).................................................................64
Figure 5.15 Effect of feed rate on the thrust force (Tool t2)...................................................................65
Figure 5.16 Effect of spindle speed on the torque (Tool t1)....................................................................65
Figure 5.17 Effect of feed rate on the torque (Tool t1)............................................................................66

vi
 List of Tables

Table 3.1Parameters of the drill. (Geometric and manufacturing).............................................................26

Table 3.2Drill profile data........................................................................................................................28
Table 3.3 Coordinates of the cross-section of the flute profile of twist drill with a 15 mm diameter and
2.1 mm web thickness.............................................................................................................................25
Table 3.4 Summery of experimental setup.............................................................................................43
Table 3.5 Parameters influencing the cutting force measurements in drilling.......................................45
Table 3.6 Cutting parameters..................................................................................................................45
Table 5.1 FEM and Experimental Thrust force and torque value..........................................................63
 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Aerospace industry requires precision holes drilling of varieties of materials. Drilling is the widely
used machining operation to drill a holes or enlarge the existing holes in parts made of metals and
recently fiber-reinforced composites with the use of multi-tooth cutting tools called drill bit. Drilling
contributes to 40% to 60% of the total material removal operations during machining. Thousands of
holes are drilled in the manufacture of an automobile and hundred thousands of holes are drilled in the
manufacture of an aircraft. Holes in metal structures are unavoidable and are the weakest part of the
structure. In addition, drilling problems accounts to expensive production waste because many drilling
operations are usually among the final stages in manufacturing process. Some of the common
problems encountered in drilling are: unnecessary forces that reduced drill life, drill fracture, burr
formation in metals and delimitation in fiber-reinforced composites, drill wander, and vibrations that
affect the surface finish and dimensional accuracy.
The literatures of metal cutting were mostly numerical and analytical model in the past. The early
force models developed for the metal cutting process were purely empirical. E.J.A. Armarego and
R.H. Brown published early literature of machining of metals [1]. E.J.A. Armarego and C.Y. Cheng[23],
E.J.A. Armarego and S. Wiriyacosol[4], M.C. Shaw[5], C.J. Oxford[6] developed the early drilling
models. As the understanding of the mechanics of metal-cutting processes improved analytical models
were formulated for the cutting forces(Merchant, [7]. Shaw et al,[89]). Recent developments in drilling
models have utilized either a mechanistic or finite element approach. Chandrasekharan et al. [101112]and
Gong Ehmann [13] have developed mechanistic drilling models. Separate models were developed for
the cutting lips and the chisel edge and a calibration procedure was proposed to determine all the
model coefficients from drilling tests . The chisel edge and cutting lips models were experimentally
validated for a wide range of machining conditions. This approach is based on the geometry of the
process and relates the force to the chip area or chip load through the specific cutting forces. The
specific cutting forces are empirically related to fundamental machining parameters and the model
coefficients are determined from calibration experiments. Sterenkowski et al. [14]has developed the
approach of dividing conventional twist drill into a series of elementary cutting section and applying
the oblique cutting model for each elementary cutting section to predict the forces and torque in
drilling.
Drilling of titanium and its alloys has been utilized in different industries but the number of published
research literature is very scare. Complicated geometry of the drill, material deformation and chip
formation is the reason why it is technically difficult to model drilling process. To achieve the cost-
effective machining of Ti, a better understanding of the underlying mechanism through the better
modeling is necessary [15].The productivity gain in drilling of titanium alloys is lacking due to its low

1
thermal conductivity and the subsequent high temperature and wear of the drill [16]. The cutting tool
industries has advanced significantly in the past decade. Improved cutting tool geometries and tool
materials are available. These development results in the high-throughput drilling of titanium alloys at
rates previously unachieved [171819] studied the characterization of cutting forces in dry machining of
titanium alloys and reported that the cutting forces increases with increase in feed and increases in
depth of cut. Drilling process has been studied by [20] using coated WC-Co drills with specially
designed drill geometry. A series of experiments in drilling of Ti6Al4V have been conducted by
Sakurai et al. [21].
The knowledge about Finite Element Model of metal drilling process in literature is very limited. The
first finite element modeling of machining was published by Klamecki [22]. Benefiting from
advancement of computational power, finite element modeling (FEM) is becoming a stander,
commercially-available tool to analyze the machining process in recent years. Strenkowski et al. [14]
developed the approach of dividing single cutting edge into series of elementary cutting sections to
predict the thrust forces and torque in drilling. Guo and Dornfeld [23]eveloped a 3D FEM for the
simulation of drilling burr formation process on the 304l stainless steel work piece. Min et al.
[24]
developed a 2D burr formation model for a twist drill, and Marusich et al. [25]simulated 3D drilling
of Ti6Al4V using conventional twist drill. A finite element approach was used by Shatla and Altan
[26]
to determine drilling torque and thrust force. Ozden Isbilir and Elasheh Ghassemien [27] carried out
the finite element analysis of drilling of titanium alloy, which provides a good estimation of thrust
force. J. Gardner, D. Dornfeld Yang and sun have developed a 3D FEM model of the machining of
Ti6Al4V alloy. This model is able to simulate the formation of continuous or discontinuous chips
during the cutting process that depends on the cutting conditions. J. Gardner, D. Dornfeld [28]
presented finite element modeling of drilling process using DEFORM. Naseer Ahmed [29]presented a
3D thermo-mechanically coupled finite element model of drilling process of steel 2080 using
DEFORM, where the author concluded that thrust force and torque increase with increasing cutting
speed and feed rate.

1.2 Drill Bit Parameters

The main features of the twist drills that play an important role in the analysis of the drilling process
are:
1. Cutting edges
2. Helix angle
3. Web and flute geometry
4. Point geometry
5. Number of flutes
6. Material
Cutting take place along the chisel edge, cutting lips, and the leading edges of the drill bit. The chisel
edge is the blunt cutting edge at the center of the drill. The chisel edge and the cutting lips are the
main cutting areas and are responsible for most of the work in material removal.The chisel edge area

2
is the least effective cutting regions, with the highest elemental cutting forces. The chisel edge
contributes mainly to the thrust force. Even the chisel edge are usually less than 20% of the drill
diameter, it nearly accounts for about 50% of the thrust force. The chisel edge engages before the
main cutting lips begin to cut, and stabilizes the drill throughout the cutting process. The main cutting
edges are the cutting lips which affect torque, thrust, radial forces, power consumption, drilling
temperature, and entry and exit burr formation. The helix angle is defined as the angle between the
leading edge and a parallel to the drill axis. It is the main parameter in the control of the rake face
along the cutting lips area of the drill. Helix angle affects the efficiency of the cutting and the strength
of the drill. Web and flute size greatly determine the strength of the drill. The two main conflicting
parameters in drill body design are adequate flute area for efficient chip evacuation and high drill
rigidity to reduce deflections and increase dynamic stability. The ratio of the web thickness to the drill
diameter directly affects the drill’s torsional and bending strength. Point geometry is the very
important feature of a twist drill. It determines the characteristics of drill’s cutting edges. The
principal geometric features of the point are the point angle (2ρ), web thickness (2w), chisel edge
angle (Ψ), and the relief angle (y). The point angle (2ρ) is defined as the angle of the cone obtained by
rotation about the drill axis of the cutting lips. An optimum point which yields maximum drill life and
hole quality exists for every work material. A standard 118 point is used for general purpose drilling
of readily machined materials. Generally, a lower point angle reduces thrust force while increasing
torque. The web thickness is usually about 15%-20% of the drill diameter for large drills, but may
reach 50% of the diameter for small drills. The optimal web thickness depends primarily on the work
material. The two flute drills are the most common but the number of flutes vary from one to four.
The optimum number of flutes on a drill depends on the drill diameter, the work piece material,
required hole quality and hole exit conditions. Generally, one-flute drills are used for deep hole
drilling, two-flute drills are used for most general purpose applications, and three and four flute drill
are used for precision tolerance work and for drilling interrupted holes or through holes in work
pieces with inclined exit surfaces. Twist drills are most commonly made of HSS (high speed steels),
HSS-Co, solid WC (carbide steels), or with tips or heads brazed on a steel body. Special applications
employ twist drills made of solid ceramics, with PCD (Polycrystalline Diamond) edges or tips brazed
on a steel body, PCD heads brazed on a WC (Tungsten Carbide) body, PCBN (Polycrystalline Cubic
Boron Nitride) and ceramic tips, and PCD veined on a WC body. High speed steel is a high carbon
tool steel, containing tungsten. A typical HSS composition is: 18% tungsten, 4% Chromium, 1%
Vanadium, 0.7% carbon and the rest, Iron. The additions of 5 to 8% cobalt to HSS impart higher
strength and wear resistance. Drills made with added cobalt are called “cobalt drills” and are used in
high end drilling applications. Carbide tools have gradually replace HSS tools in many of the tool
applications in machining, but HSS is still widely in use in some specific segments of tools like drills,
reamers, form turning tools etc. The advantage of HSS over carbide is its strength to withstand cutting
forces and the low cost of the tools. HSS also performs well at intermittent cutting applications. But
the greatest limitation of HSS is that its usable cutting range is far lower compared to carbide. Though
carbide drill are gradually taking over HSS drills, but from cutting economy in drilling, particularly
when drilling small diameters and larger depths, HSS are favorable. Drill breakage while cutting is a
major cost concern with solid carbide drill. Another great advantage of using HSS drills is that it can

3
perform in old machines with limited power.

Figure 1.1 Geometry of standard two flute twist drill

1.3 Drilling

Drilling; the stander process for producing holes, is among the most common material removal
process. Yet, drilling is one of the complex operations to model. Consider the three most fundamental
chip-making process: milling, drilling and turning. One of the process stands out. In milling and
turning, cutting takes place in the open, making it possible to learn a great deal about the behavior of
the cut through observation alone. But in drilling and related hole making operation, the action is
hidden. No one can see what happen in the cut and no unaided eye can see the machined surface
unless the hole is cut open. This invisibility as much as any other factor, probably accounts for why
the mechanics of hole making have been so poorly understood. Geometrically, drilling is one of the
most complex machining processes, due to the complex geometry of the tools. The difficulty of
producing drills with consistent geometries has limited accuracy; although drill consistency and
repeatability has greatly increased recently with the use of the CAD based design and CNC drill
grinders. The same complexity of the tool geometry has hinder the introduction of new tool materials,
so that the productivity gains in drilling have lagged those made in turning and milling over lastfew
decades. Drilling is applied to a large variety of materials in different industries, but has been mostly

4
studied for metals cutting. In recent years, non-metallic materials (plastics, ceramics and composite
materials) are steadily replacing metallic parts in various industries. As the underlying mechanism of
the cutting process in these materials are not yet fully understood and modeled, drilling is often
employed for metallic structures, leading to a high rate of failures and low efficiencies. The
performance of the drilling operation is evaluated based on the quality of the hole, the cycle time, and
the cost of the tool per hole drilled. The quality of the hole includes characteristics such as roundness
and cylindricity errors, surface finish, burrs, delimitation in drilling fiber-reinforced composites etc.
Drilling performance cannot be analyzed without considering the process parameters. Cutting
parameters (speed and feed), cutting condition (dry, with coolant), work-piece characteristics
(material, geometry, structure etc.), fixture configuration and the machine tool are to be considered in
the drilling process analysis. The major operating parameters to be specified in drilling process
analysis are the spindle speed (n[rpm] and feed (f[mm/rev]). Most of the performance parameters are
related to the cutting forces generated in the process. Modeling the cutting forces in drilling in terms
of the tool geometry and machining conditions is essential to develop a simulation-based platform for
the design and evaluation of new drill point geometry to improve quality and productivity.

Figure 1.2 Drilling fixture

5
1.4 Titanium Alloys

Lightweight, high strength materials such as titanium alloys are increasingly used in aircraft structure
that are subjected to temperature up to 1000oC. Titanium alloys are classified into groups based on the
alloying elements and the resultant predominant room temperature constituent phases. The group
include α alloy, α – β alloy and β alloy. The α can be divided into two types, commercially pure grades
of titanium and those with additions of α-stabilizers such as Al and Sn. α alloys are non-heat treatable
and generally very weldable. They have low to medium strength, good notch toughness, reasonably
good ductility and possess excellent mechanical properties which offer optimum high temperature
creep strength and oxidation resistance (Boyer, 1996; Ezugwu and Wang, 1997) [51, 52]. These include
alloys such as Ti3Al2.5V, Ti5Al2.5Sn, Ti8AlMoV and Ti6Al2Sn4Zr2Mo. A wide variety of
application for α alloys includes gas turbine engine casing, air frame skin and structural components
and jet engine compressor blades.
Most of the titanium alloys used in industry contain α and β stabilizers. These alloys include Ti6Al4V,
Ti6Al6V2Sn and Ti6Al2Sn4Zr6Mo. They are heat treatable and most are weldable especially with the
lower β stabilizer. Their strength levels are medium to high. These alloys possess excellent
combination of strength, toughness and corrosion resistance. Typical applications include blades and
discs for jet engine turbines and compressors, structural aircraft components and landing gears
chemical process equipment marine components and surgical implants. The high strength, low weight
ratio and outstanding corrosion resistance inherent to titanium and its alloys has let to wide and
diversified range of successful applications which demand high level of reliable performance in
aerospace, automotive, chemical plant, power generation, oil and gas extraction, medicine and other
major industries. Titanium alloys possess the best combination of physical and metallurgical
properties and are engineering material of choice due to their high strength-to-weight ratio, low
density (density of titanium is about 60% of that of steel or nickel-based super alloys), high corrosion
resistance, high erosion resistance and low modulus of elasticity. Ti6Al4V is the most widely used
titanium alloy. It features good machinability and excellent mechanical properties. The Ti6Al4V alloy
offers the best all round performance for a variety of weight reduction applications in aerospace,
automotive and marine equipment. The aerospace application of Ti6Al4V is more than 80%.
Advantage of Ti6Al4V
1. Light weight
2. High temperature resistance
3. High fracture resistance
4. High stiffness
5. Anti-corrosion properties
Disadvantage of Ti6Al4V
1. Low thermal conductivity results in high cutting temperature
2. High strength at elevated temperature which enhance tool wear
3. High chemical reactivity with the cutting tool

6
1.5 FEM Method

Due to the lack of analytical solutions to model complicated material deformation process,Finite
element method (FEM) is a main computational tool for modeling simulation of tool-work piece
interaction in metal cutting. FEM models of complex machining processes provide insight into the
underlying mechanics of material behavior at high strain and strain rate regimes efficiently. An
accurate and reliable FEM simulation of drilling enables good predictions of strain and stress
distributions; cutting forces and torque by integrating complex drill geometry and process parameters.
The modeling and simulating of the machining operation is of great interest to the researchers in order
to gain better understanding of the cutting force, chip formation mechanisms, heat generation in
cutting zone, tool-chip interaction and residual stresses developed in the work piece. With the advent
of high power computing facilities, simulation of the drilling process using FEM analysis provides an
excellent tool for this challenging problem.
Machining in drilling happens by shearing away the work piece material in the form of chip by the
cutting edge of the high speed rotting drill bit. The chip is separated away from the work piece
material. The maximum plastic strain model is a criterion for material separation to form chip in
DEFORM-3D. Elements slip for the nodes to form chip. The maximum plastic strain model assumes
that material separation occurs when an elements reaches a critical plastic strain for the work piece
material model.
Yield occurs when the largest principal stress exceeds the uniaxial tensile yield strength.
σ1 ≤ σy (1.1)
Since stress and strain are tensor qualities they can be described on the basis of three principal
directions, in the case of stress these are denoted byσ 1,σ2 andσ3.Yield occurs when the maximum
plastic strain reaches the strain corresponding to the yield point. In terms of the principal stresses this
is determined by the equation:
σ1 – v (σ2+σ3) ≤ σy (1.2)
Drilling simulation in DEFORM are time consuming. The problem size are to be optimized for
efficiency. Optimization include keeping the work piece as small as possible while capturing
geometry (both in diameter and thickness), using the largest element which can adequately capture
chip geometry, and possible pre-shaping the work piece to eliminate the necessity to simulate the
transient point penetration before the drill reaches full depth. The simulation in this paper was carried
out in Heat Transfer mode and the units were SI units. Both the drill bit and work piece were
converted into finite element mesh in the re – processor to simulate the drilling process. The
simulation results and thrust forces were viewed using DEFORM – 3D post processors.

1.6 Objective and Scope of the Thesis

Machining is a manufacturing process in which materials are cut away from the work piece in the
form of chip. Machining is the widely used manufacturing processes to produce the desired shape of
final products, and its technology continues to progress in parallel with developments in materials,

7
computers, and sensors. Machining operations take place between a cutting tool and work piece
material mounted on a machine tool. The motion of the machine tool is controlled by its CNC unit,
and Numerically Controlled commands to CNC are generated on computer-aided design/computer-
aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems. The productivity and accuracy of the metal removal
operation depend on the preparation of NC programs, planning of machining process parameters and
cutting conditions, cutter geometry, work and tool materials, machine tool rigidity, and performance
of the CNC unit. A blank is converted into final product by cutting extra material away by operations
such as turning, milling, drilling, boring, and grinding, conducted on Computer Numerically
Controlled (CNC) machine tools. Of all these machining operation, drilling stands out. Drilling
operations are challenging. Drilling tools are complicated and material removal process is complex. It
is difficult to produce holes with consistent geometry in drilling. Drilling operation is also plagued by
many problems. In spite of the advancement is scientific technology the demand for economically
producing holes, drill manufacturing and drilling still remains the complex and difficult task to
accomplish. That’s why drilling operation hasn’t progress much in the past few decade and
productivity gain in drilling is lacking. There is also lack of research in drilling of titanium alloys.
FEM models of drilling are hard to come across. Considering these facts into account the objective of
this thesis is to develop FEM model, to simulate the dynamics and kinematics of a drilling process of
titanium alloy with a conventional twist drill to study the influence of the cutting parameters on the
drilling thrust force and torque magnitude. This will also reduce/eliminate experiments to be
conducted in predicting various forces developed during drilling operation of Titanium alloys. By
understanding the influence of cutting parameters we can improve the productivity and improve tool
life, by understanding the force generation we can eliminate the problems related with drilling and
overall increase the hole quality of drilling process. The specific objectives of the thesis are to:
1. Model twist drill bit with a CAD/CAM package.
2. Develop FEM model of the drill bit and Ti6Al4V material.
3. Develop FEM model of the drilling process, utilize the model and simulate the drilling operation.
4. Obtain the FEM thrust force and torque magnitude for different speeds and feeds.
5. Conduct drilling experiment of Ti6Al4V alloy with a twist drill.
6. Compare the FEM results with the experimental value to verify.

8
 Chapter 2 DRILLING OF TITANIUM ALLOYS

2.1 Mechanics of Metal Cutting

Machining processes refer to the manufacturing process of producing metallic parts by removing
unwanted materials in the form of plastically deformed chip. The unwanted materials are removed by
cutting. Drilling is a traditional machining process based on chip-forming. Drilling is especially
important because it accounts for a large portion of overall machining operations. For all the
traditional machining process based on chip-forming, unified physical analysis can be carried out
using basic orthogonal and oblique cutting models. Different traditional machining process based on
chip-formation can be compared and relate to oblique or orthogonal cutting.

Figure 2.3Orthogonal and oblique cutting model.

The difference between oblique and orthogonal cutting models is the inclination angle (i) which is
zero in the case of orthogonal cutting. The presence of an inclination angle (i) between the cutting
edge and the normal to the tool motion direction generate a third force component when compared
with the planar situation of the cutting forces in orthogonal cutting, which required additional theories
and mathematical derivations. Most of the traditional machining processes have a geometrical
configuration as in the oblique cutting model. However, to validate certain force models specifically
designed experiments are conducted according to the orthogonal cutting model. The mechanics of
more complex three-dimensional oblique cutting operation are usually evaluated by geometrical and
kinematic transformation models applied to the orthogonal cutting process.

9
Drilling operation are carried out with multi point tool called drill bit. The cutting edges of drill bits
have variable geometry depending on the point of distance from the drill axis. The cutting action
along the cutting edges can be considered as occurring within a series of oblique sections. So unlike
other cutting tools, monitoring the whole cutting edge in not enough in the case of drilling. The
cutting edge must be divided into section of elements of identical size to study the influence of
geometrical parameters on the load magnitude. The mechanics of oblique cutting can be applied to
these section elements to obtain the magnitude of thrust force and torque magnitude. The total thrust
and torque exerted on the drill can be evaluated by summing the magnitude of each individual section
element. The model is based on representing the drill point geometry as a series of oblique sections.
A model for oblique cutting is presented for analyzing a single section in the cutting lip region of the
drill. Results of these sections are then combined to determine the thrust force and torque for various
operating conditions.

Figure 2.4 Model of oblique cutting (Usui et.al[31])

Consider first the simplest case of a tool with an oblique cutting edge as shown in figure 2.2, which
has been adapted from Usui et al. The inclination angle of the main cutting edge is i, the depth of cut
is t1, and the cutting width is b. The underlying assumption is that a chip is produced by shear forces
acting in the plane CJFD with the main cutting edge CD.
Three-dimensional cutting can be interpreted as a collection of plane strain orthogonal cutting slices.
One typical plane is represented by IHERQGC, which is cross-hatched in figure 2.2. This plane is
defined by the cutting velocity V and the chip flow velocity vector V c. Chip formation in this plane
may be regarded as plane strain deformation with a corresponding shear angle, mean friction angle,
and work material shear strength as in orthogonal cutting. Therefore, line CE may be regarded as
coincident with the shear plane and line HI may be considered to be the undeformed chip thickness in
orthogonal cutting. Any other plane that is parallel to the plane IHERQGC will have the same
effective shear plane angle φe and effective rake angle αe, but with a different depth of cut t. Therefore,
three-dimensional cutting is interpreted as a series of orthogonal slices, each with the same effective
shear plane angle and effective rake angle along the main cutting edge. The effective rake angle α e is
measured in the plane formed by the chip flow velocity V c and cutting velocity V, and it is defined by

10
the angle between the chip flow direction and a line normal to the cutting velocity, as shown in figure
2.2. This angle can be related to the chip flow angle (ηc), inclination angle (i), and rake angle (αn) by
αe= sin-1(sinαncosicosηc + sinηcsini) (2.1)
The chip flow angle ηc can be determined by using a minimum energy approach. The total cutting
energy rate consists of the shear energy rate (U s) on the shear plane and friction energy rate (U f) on the
tool face. The shear energy rate Us can be expressed as:
Us= τs Vs A (2.2)
where, τs is the shear stress in the shear plane and V s is the shear velocity in the shear plane. The area
of the shear plane area of CJFD is A, which is equal to the cross-product of the vectors CE and CD, as
shown in figure 2.2. An orthogonal coordinate system with origin at point C is defined as shown in
this figure. The x-axis is defined along line CI and parallel to the cutting velocity vector V. The y-axis
is in the plane determined by V and the tool edge CD. The angle between the y-axis and line CD is i.
The z-axis, not shown in figure 2.2, is perpendicular to the x- and y-axes to form a right-handed
coordinate system.
The length of lines CG and HI are given by

t1 t 1 cos α e
CG = and HI= (2.3)
cos α n cos nc tan ϕe cos α n cos nc
Vectors CE and CD can be expressed as:

t 1 cos α e
CE= [ ,√ ¿,t 1] (2.4)
cos α η cos ηc tan ø c

CD = [-b tani , b, 0] (2.5)

The area A is equal to the cross-product CE CD, which can be rearranged as:

A = b t 21 ( 1+ tan 2 i ) + z 2 ¿ ¿ (2.6)
√
where,
p 2 2
z=
tanø e
+ √( p −t ) tani
1 (2.7)

p= (2.8)

Based on orthogonal cutting theory, velocity is the shear plane is given by

cos α e
Vs = V (2.9)
cos ⁡( ø e−α )
e

where ø e is the angle between the shear plane and cutting velocity, and α eis the effective rake angle.
Thus, the shear energy rate Us in Eq.(2) can be rewritten as,

11
 τ s A cos α e τ s A cos α e τ s A cos α e
Us = V V V (2.10)
cos ⁡( ø e−α ) cos ⁡( ø e−α ) cos ( ϕ e −α e )
e e

The friction energy rate Uf on the rake face can be found by a similar analysis to be

sin ø e
Uf = F t V (2.11)
cos ⁡( ø e−α )
e

where,
F t is the friction force on the rake surface.
In order to calculate the total energy rate from Eqn. (2.10) and (2.11), the effective shear plane angle
ø e and the shear plane stress τ Smust be known. It is assumed that the relationships between ø e and τ S
and the effective rake angle α earethe same as those in orthogonal cutting under equivalent conditions.
In addition, by assuming that the friction force acting on a unit width of the tool face with undeformed
chip thickness t is the same as the friction force in orthogonal cutting with unit width of cut and
undeformed chip thickness t, the friction force Ft can be written as.

τ s sin β cos α e
Ft = Q (2.12)
cos ( ϕ e −β−α e ) sin ϕ e

Where β is the friction angle on the tool face, and Q for a sharp nose tool can be written as

bt1
Q= (2.13)
cos icos α n
Eqn. (2.12) and (2.13) are used to calculate the friction energy rate Uf.
The total cutting energy rate can be found by adding the contribution from the shear and friction
energy rates. Note that the energy rates are dependent on the chip flow angle η c, which is not known.
However, the angle can be found from the condition that the chip will flow in a direction that
minimizes the cutting energy U. Based on the minimum cutting energy, the tool force components can
be derived from geometric considerations:
F = N cos α η cosi+ F sin α e
H t t (2.14)
F = -N sin α η+ ¿F cos ηc cos α η(2.15)
V t t

F = -N cos α η sini F sin ηc cosi−¿ F cos ηc sin isin α η(2.16)

T t + t t

Where FH, FV and FT are the principal (cutting), vertical (thrust), and transverse components of the tool
force, respectively, and Nt and Ft are the normal and friction forces that can be determined once the

minimum energy is known. The force components are functions of α n , i, b, t1, and ηc,, which are

known constants, except for the chip flow angle η c, which can be evaluated by minimizing the cutting
energy.
2.2 Drilling model
The mechanics drilling is different for the chisel edge and cutting edge region. The chisel edge does
not cut but only push the material side-ways by an indention mechanism. The cutting edge cuts the

12
hole by removing the material in the form of chip. The thrust force that is used to push the drill in the
work piece and the torque applied to the drill are required to evaluate the mechanics of the drilling
operations. The mechanics of drilling must be analyzed separately for the chisel and cutting edge
region. The cutting action of the main cutting edges of the drill is described closely with the oblique
cutting theory but with variable cutting speeds, inclination angle and normal rake angle along the lip.
The rake angle is closely related to helix angle and decreases progressively with the helix angle from
the outer corner of the drill to the chisel edge. On the other hand, the cutting action on the chisel edge
is described to be closer to the orthogonal cutting theory at relatively high negative rake angles and
very low cutting speeds.

Figure 2.5 Close-up of a cutting action of different cutting elements along the single cutting edge of a
twist drill.

Figure2.3 shows the tip-geometry of a twist drill and detailed pictures of four cutting sections namely
[1][2][3][4], along the chisel edge and cutting lip. Drilling is characterized by oblique cutting, where
rake angle, oblique angle and cutting speed vary over a wide range along the cutting lips. It is clear
from the figure that the geometry of the cutting edge of the drilling tools varies at each elementary
cutting sections in relation to the radial distance from the drill axis. At the center [1], the rake angle is
highly negative, nearly -60o. Along the cutting edge away from the dill axis, the rake angle gradually
increases and become maximum at the periphery of the tool. The variable geometry of the cutting
edge greatly influence the overall machining operation of drilling process. At the center of the drill
[1], the cutting action is not efficient due to high negative rake angle. The chisel edge works as an
indenter and merely pushes the material sideways. From the edge of the chisel edge towards the
periphery of the drill, the chip formation changes from extrusion, with discontinuous chip formation,

13
to cutting through shearing of the material. For the drilling model, each cutting edge is divided into
elementary cutting sections. At each oblique cutting section, the three-dimensional cutting forces are
to be calculated and then combined to determine the drilling thrust and torque. The geometry of a
typical twist drill are defined in terms of three key parameters, helix angle (δ), point angle (2ρ), and
web-thickness (2w).

Figure 2.6 Elementary cutting sections.

For each section, the rake and inclination angle are needed. For straight cutting lips, the inclination
angle (i) and normal rake angle αn can be determined as:
w sin ρ
sin i= (2.17)
r
tan α n= cos i (tanαs cosCs+tan αbsinCs) (2.18)

tan δ tani
tan α s −
tan C s sin C s
= (2.19)

cos ρ
cos C s = (2.20)
cos i
r
tan αb = (2.21)
L
−1 2 πr 2 πr
= tan ( ) ( )
L
tan−1
L
(2.22)

Where,(w) is the half web thickness, (r) is the radial distance from the drill axis and (L) is the pitch
length of the helix on the drill. Using the single edge oblique cutting model, forces in the horizontal,
vertical and lateral directions can be determined on the local coordinate system. These local forces
must transformed to the radial, axial and transverse direction of the drill. Forces in the axial direction

14
contribute to the thrust force. The torque is the transverse force times the radial distance to the axis of
the drill. The radial force is neutral due to the symmetry of the cutting edge.
Figure2.5shows the direction of the local (F H, FV, FT) force and global force components (Ftang, Fthrust,
Frad) at an arbitrary point along the drill cutting edge. The local oblique forces can be transformed to
global drills coordinates by the following equations.
F tang= F H (2.23)

F thrust= FT + FV √(r ¿ ¿ 2−w2 ) sin ρ ¿ (2.24)

r

2
F rad= FT √ (r ¿ 2−w ) sin ρ ¿- FVcos ρ (2.25)
¿
r

Figure 2.7 Conversion of local forces (FH, FV, FT) in oblique cutting to global force components in
drilling (Ftang, Fthrust, Frad).
Cutting along the chisel edge is not efficient due to large negative rake angle and lower cutting speed.
The cutting speed varies from zero at the center to maximum at the transition with the cutting edge.
The cutting forces along the chisel edge contribute more than half of the thrust force but very small
portion of the drilling torque. Cutting along the chisel edge can be treated as equivalent orthogonal
cutting. Although the chisel edge removes little material, it plays an important role in providing drill
point strength.

2.3 Drilling Process Analysis

The mechanics of drilling deal with the prediction of cutting forces action on the tool. Drilling

15
performance cannot be analyzed without consideration of the process parameters. Cutting parameters
(spindle speed and feed rate), cutting condition (dry, with coolant or lubricant), work-piece
characteristics (material, geometry, structure etc.), fixture configuration and the machine tool are to be
considered in the drilling process analysis. The cutting parameters to be specified in drilling process
analysis are the spindle speed (n[rpm] and axial feed (f[mm/rev]).The main parameters that affect the
drilling are: a) Cutting speed V measured at the periphery of drill in [mm/min], b) Feed f the distance
the tool moves into work piece per spindle revolution in [mm/rev], and c) Radial depth of cut b. The
feed rate fr is the speed with which the tool penetrate into the material in [mm/min].The uncut chip
shown in figure2.6 (c) and its area is determined by the radial depth of cut and the feed rate. The twist
drill shown has two flutes, and every tooth therefore cuts a chip thickness of half the feed per
revolution. The cutting torque Tc and the thrust force Fz acting on the tool are determined by the uncut
chip area. When the drill is not vibrating, the uncut chip thickness does not change over time, except
when the tool enters the work piece and exits from it.

Figure 2.8 (a) Thrust Force Fz and Torque Tc Acting on The Tool, b) Cutting Speed VC, (c) Definition
of Feed f.

The rotating speed of the spindle (n) is the main factor to influence the cutting velocity (V[mm/min]).
In drilling the cutting speed varies along the radial direction, and is calculated at the surface on
outside diameter of the drill. The cutting speed at the periphery can be expressed as
V = π *D*n (2.26)
Where D is the drill diameter.
The axial feed (f) is the tool advancement per revolution along its cutting path in mm/rev. The feed
rate fr is the speed at which the tool advances into the part in [mm/min], and is related to f through the
spindle speed n by:
fr = f* n (2.27)
The feed per tooth (ft[mm/rev]) depends on axial feed (f) and the number of flutes N, and is used
calculate the depth of cut (tc)
f
Ft = (2.28)
N

16
The feed rate is the input parameter provided to the machine tool. The feed is usually employed in
drilling process analysis as more representative in describing the process. The usage of coolant or
lubricant has a strong influence on the cutting forces by aiding the chip evacuation and lowering the
friction forces and the temperature of the drill, although it is difficult to mathematically account for
their influence into a drilling model.
Drilling process analysis usually involves the calculation of the drilling forces, which are used to
estimate the drill loads, power consumption, thermal loads and hole quality aspects. The cutting forces
measured during drilling experiments are referred to as thrust (axial force-F z [N]) and torque
(rotational momentum –Mz [Nm]). During typical experiments these forces are measured on the time
scale from drill entry into the work-piece to full engagement and drill exit from the material. The time
to machine Tm is calculated as:
t
Tm = (2.29)
fr
Also, the material removal rate in drilling can be calculated using.
2
π D fr
MRR = (2.30)
4

2.4 Machinability of Titanium Alloys

Drilling of Titanium and its alloys are intensive due to its inherent properties and complexity
associated with the drilling process. Titanium alloys have poor machinability and are considered
difficult to machine material. Due to the low thermal conductivity of these alloys, the cutting zone
temperature rises sharply during machining causing rapid thermal related wear of the tool. This is the
reason why machining of titanium are usually recommended with lower cutting speed and high
material removal rate (MRR) of titanium alloys are hard to achieve. In drilling, high MRR and long
drill life are desirable to increase productivity and reduce cost.
Research works on the machinability of titanium alloys have been conducted extensively and
reviewed comprehensively by several researchers. The increasing demands of titanium alloys with
excellent high temperature, mechanical and chemical properties make them more difficult to machine.
According to Ezugwu et al. (2003) [54], machinability can be phrased as the difficult to machine a
particular material under a given set of the machining parameters such as cutting speed, feed rate and
depth of cut. It can be rated in term of tool life, surface quality, the reaction of cutting forces and also
machining cost per part. Basically work hardening, low thermal conductivity, abrasiveness, high
strength level and high heat generation are the dominant reasons for the difficulty in machining
titanium alloys. Excessive heat damage the cutting tool rapidly. The main sources of heat during
machining are from the shear zone, from the tool-chip interface friction and from the tool work-piece
interface. Titanium can be cut very easily, but only if the tools are kept sharp. It is always easier to
sharpen a tool than to have a wear develop. Proper tool angles, adequate coolants and the use of slow
speeds and heavy feeds are also favorable. Due to the fact that titanium has low thermal conductivity,
when cutting, the chips have a tendency to gall and weld to the cutting edges on the tool. This always

17
speeds up the wear on the tool itself. Rather than lose production, it is best to work the tool to its
maximum capacity and then replace it when productivity decreases. To lengthen tool life, use of the
proper coolant is necessary to reduce cutting temperature and inhibit galling. Cutting fluids containing
chlorine, fluorine, bromine and iodine should not be used, in order to avoid corrosion problems.
Drilling can be accomplished successfully with ordinary high speed steel drills. When drilling
titanium, the most important factor is the length of the unsupported section of the drill.
Some problems associated with drilling of titanium include:
1. High drilling temperature
2. Rapid thermal wear of the drill
3. Relatively lower recommended cutting parameters resulting in limited productivity
4. Complicated material deformation and chip evacuation
5. Burr formation for conventional drill.
The cost effective productive drilling of titanium alloys has proven difficult due to low thermal
conductivity (Ti6Al4V is 6.6W/mK) and the subsequent high temperature and diffusion wear of drill.
The lower thermal conductivity of titanium alloys hinders quick dissipation of the heat caused by
machining. Machining of titanium and its alloys differs from traditional engineering materials like
steel, in several ways, mainly due to the thermal conductivity of the material is very low when
compared to the steel (KTi is 7.3 W/mK and KSteel is 50.7 W/mK). This results in the high
temperature around the region of chip, tool and work piece causing the rapid thermal related wear of
the tool such as diffusion wear, adhesion wear. Titanium and its alloys have high chemical reactivity
with most of the available cutting tool materials. Hence during the machining of the titanium alloy, the
tools wears out rapidly due to high cutting temperature and strong adhesion between tool and work
piece material. Additionally, the low modulus of elasticity of titanium alloys and its high strength at
elevated temperature makes the machining further difficult. The lower modulus of elasticity of
titanium leads to spring back after deformation under the cutting load. This causes titanium parts to
move away from the cutting tool during machining which leads to high dimensional deviation in work
piece. The lower hardness of titanium and its higher chemical reactivity leads to tendency for galling
of titanium with the cutting tool and thereby altering the tool geometry such as the rake angle. The use
of better tool material with better drill geometry design, higher strength, and hot hardness can enable
larger feed in drilling. The cutting tool industry has advanced significantly, in the past decade. Fine-
grained tungsten carbide in cobalt matrix (WC-Co) tool materials and new cutting tool geometries
have become commercially available. These advances now allow high-MRR drilling of Ti alloys at
previously unachievable rates (Li and Shih 2007)[17].
The feed for turning of Al alloys can be 1.00 and 2.05 using high-speed steel (HSS) and tungsten
carbide in cobalt matrix (WC-Co) tools respectively. Gray cast iron can be turned at 0.75, 0.65, and
1.00 mm/rev with HSS, ceramic, and WC-Co tools. In comparison, the recommended maximum feed
is small for Ti6Al4V, 0.40 mm/rev, using a WC-Co tool. In drilling, the maximum recommended feed
depends on the drill diameter. For drilling using a WC-Co twist drill with diameter less than 6mm, the
feeds for Al alloys, gray cast iron, and Ti6Al4V are 0.18, 0.10 and 0.06 mm/rev respectively. Beside
feed, cutting speed can also be increased to improve the MRR. Depending on the work and tool
materials, the cutting speed in machining may vary considerably. In turning, Al alloys can be

18
machined at 300m/min using HSS and 600m/min using WC-Co tool materials. For gray cast iron,
typical maximum cutting speeds are 40, 120 and 450 m/min, using HSS, WC-Co, and ceramic cutting
tools, respectively. Machining Ti alloys at high speed are difficult because of the inherent material
properties, particularly low thermal conductivity, which results in high tool temperature at increased
cutting speed. High tool temperature accelerate tool wear and limits drill life. For, Ti alloys. Over
100m/min can be considered as high speed in turning. The cutting speed of drilling is typically much
lower than that of turning. Using a HSS twist drill with diameter less than 6mm, the maximum
recommended peripheral cutting speeds for Al alloys, gray cast iron and Ti6Al4V ARE 105, 49, AND
11m/min respectively. The recommended cutting speed for drilling Ti alloys is very low. The lower
cutting speed with higher feed rate is recommended in drilling as it helps to reduce temperature and
improve drills life. This has hindered the productivity and increased the cost of machining Ti for
industrial application.

2.5 Tool Wear and Surface Integrity in Drilling Process

Heat generation, pressure, friction and stress distribution are the main cause of drill wear. The drill
wear can be classified into (Kanai et al., 1978) [55]: outer corner wear, flank wear, margin wear, crater
wear along with two types of chisel edge wear and chipping at the cutting lips. Wear starts at the sharp
corners of the cutting edges and distributed along the cutting edges until the chisel and drill margin.
Flank wear is considered as one of the criterion to measure the performance of a drill. It occur due to
the friction between the work-piece and the contact area on the clearance surface. However, Kanai et
al. (1978)[55] suggested that outer corner wear should be used as the main criteria of tool performance
because of the relative ease of measurement and the close relationship between this type of wear and
the drill life. Surface integrity is the unimpaired or enhanced surface condition of a material resulting
from the impact of a controlled manufacturing process (Field and Kahles, 1964) [56]. Damaged layer
and surface integrity of the finished surface significantly influence the wear resistance, corrosion
resistance and fatigue strength of the machined components. Surface integrity produced by metal
removal operation can be categorized as geometrical surface integrity and physical surface integrity.
To find the impact of the manufacturing process on the material properties both categories effects
must be considered. Surface integrity aspects are very important, especially in aerospace industry with
respect to the high degree of safety. Surface integrity is concerned primarily on the effect of the
machining process on the changes in surface and sub-surface of the component which are categorized
as surface roughness, plastic deformation, residual stress and micro hardness. Studies showed that
surface roughness value is lower at high cutting speed when drilling Ti6Al4V using carbide drills
(Sharif & Rahim, 2007)[57]. During machining at high cutting speed, the cutting temperature increases
due to small contact length between tool-cutting interfaces. This could be due to the decrease in the
value of coefficient of friction, which results in low friction at the tool-work piece interface. These
factors could contribute to the improvement in surface roughness. In addition, as the cutting speed
increases, more heat is generated thus softening work piece material, which in turn improves the
surface roughness.
The micro hardness alterations observed during machining may be due to the effect of thermal,

19
mechanical and chemical reaction. Many researchers believed that the work piece matter is subjected
to work hardening and thermal softening effect during machining, especially at high cutting
temperature and pressure. When machining titanium alloys, the hardness just beneath the machined
surface was found to be softer than the bulk material hardness due to the thermal softening effect.
However, when the depth below the machined surface increases, the hardness value starts to increase
before reaching its peak value and finally drops gradually to the bulk material hardness. It is
discernible that the surface and sub-surface of the machined surface are subjected to plastically
deform. Sub-surface plastic deformation is particularly due to the effect of large strain, strain rate and
temperature. In addition, a freshly cut surface may be burnished by a dull cutting tool, hence work
hardened the machined surface. In most cases, plastic deformation occurs towards the spindle
rotational direction. When drilling titanium alloys at higher cutting speeds and feed rates, a thicker
plastic deformation can be observed. At this condition, the temperature between tool-chip interfaces
increased thus sticking friction regions occurred. Therefore, the combination of high cutting
temperature and sticking friction contributed to the severe and noticeable subsurface plastic
deformation.

20
 Chapter 3 FEM MODEL OF DRILLING.

3.1 Simulating Drilling Processes with DEFORM-3D

This chapter discusses the, complete modeling and meshing technique used in the development of
drilling process simulation. All the aspects of the simulation are briefly introduced.
DEFORM – 3D is a powerful process simulation system designed to analyze the three dimensional
material flow of complex manufacturing processes. DEFORM – 3D is an efficient tool to predict the
material flow in large deformation processes. Typical applications include turning, milling, forging,
boring, drilling, heat treatment etc. Deform has been used to model the drilling process recently.
Deform generates useful results but it is can be very difficult to obtain these results consistently. The
program is subjected to crashing if the parameters are not set properly but by recognizing the common
errors, useful simulations and results can be generated efficiently and large amount of information can
be obtained that is not easily achieved through experiments. A machining specific preprocessor
streamlines the setup of routine turning, drilling and milling simulations. For more complex
processes, the standard preprocessors provides considerable flexibility in the problem setup.
DEFORM – 3D is the foundation of comprehensive modelling system that integrates raw material
production, forming, heat treatment and machining. The system can predict chip shape, cutting force,
tool and work piece temperature, tool wear and residual stress.

3.2 Parametric Modeling of Twist Drill

In this paper, a two flute twist drill is modeled parametrically and were imported to FEM model for
drilling process simulation. Parametric modeling of twist drill is a method to create models of twist
drills with straight cutting lips using analytical equations to generate drill flute profile and solid
modeling techniques to generate geometric models of twist drills. Twist drill is general purpose end-
cutting tool which has one or more straight or helical flutes to allow fluids to enter and chips to
be ejected and are used to produce holes ranging in size from 0.1mm to 100mm. Twist drill vary
widely in form, dimension, and tolerance. Twist drills are classified according to the material from
which they are made, their lengths, shapes, number of flutes, point characteristics, shank style and
size series. The best type of drill for a given application depends on the material to be drilled, its
structural characteristics, the hole dimensions, weather the material to be drilled is cored or solid,
whether a through or blind hole is required and the characteristics of the machine tool and fixture and
cutting condition. The cutting forces depend on the tool and work piece material properties, tool
geometry and machining conditions. Typically in industry, the drill point geometry and machining
conditions are selected to meet the part specifications. Tests are conducted with various tool geometry
and machining parameters and the tool that performs the best is selected. While this approach may

21
lead to a solution to a single problem it may provide very limited information that may be used to
solve other problems or even to further improve on the current solution.
Twist drills are the most common type of drills, but differ widely from their geometry point of
view. The twist drill is composed of shank, body and point. Flutes are grooves that are cut in the body.
The margin is a thin raised edge of the body which is extended along the length of the flute. The web
at the center of the drill forms the chisel edge at the drill point. In general the web is tapered and the
thickness increases from the drill point towards the shank to provide stability which allows faster
penetration. The point of the drill is formed by two straight cutting edges joined by the chisel edge
across the center. The angle between the two main edges is called the point angle. The angle
between the cutting edge and the chisel edge is called chisel edge angle. A twist drill is fabricated with
3 major parts. The most important features from the analytical point of view are rake angle,
point angle, web thickness, nominal clearance angle, drill diameter, inclination angle, and chisel
edge angle. The rake angle is usually specified as helix angle at the periphery. Drill point
geometry has a significant effect on the drill performance and is the most critical portion of the drill. It
is determined by the configuration of the drill flank and the flute. The direction of the chip flow is
attributed to the point angle. The torque decreases with the increasing point angle due to the
increase of orthogonal rake angle at each point on the main cutting edges. Furthermore, the thrust
forces always increases with increasing point angle. High accuracy, efficiency and reliability in
machining industry can only be ensured by adopting high quality cutting tools. To develop a tool,
accurate solid model of the tool is to be established first, second to predict the tool performance in
machining to optimize the tool, and third to grind the tool. The following parameters (geometric and
manufacturing) are needed to completely describe a drill:

Table 3.1 parameters of the drill. (Geometric and manufacturing)

Geometric Manufacturing
Radius of drill (R) x-shift of cone (d)
Web thickness (w) y-shift of cone (S)

Helix angle (h) Half Cone angle (Ɵ)

Drill Half-point angle (p)

Geometrically a drill is made of a drill body and a shank. The drill body is portion responsible for
material removal and shank is the part by which the drill is held and driven in a drilling machine.
However, for the convenience of modeling, the drill body may be viewed as segment of flute and
point geometry. The flute is the cutting portion of the drill extending from shank to the outer corners
of the cutting edge. The point of the drill is that portion that facilitates entry of the drill into the work
piece and is an extension of the drill body. The drill flute is composed of two parts, the primary
(cutting edge) flute and the secondary (non-cutting edge) flute. The primary flute is that portion of the
drill flute which yields the cutting edge through the intersection of the flute and grinding surfaces. The
secondary flute is not as critical as the primary flute for the cutting action. Its shape can be defined in
a manner to facilitate effective removal of chips and to provide sufficient strength and rigidity to the

22
drill body. The geometry of the fluted shank of a twist drill is formed by sweeping helically the cross-
section of the drill profile across the length of cylindrical fluted portion of the drill (L). The parameter
of sweeping is determined by helix (β), or the ratio of diameter of cutting end of drill (Dc) to the pitch
(P). The fluted surface of the two flute drill is made up of three surface patches, namely, land, flank
and flute. The point geometry of the twist drill is dependent on the grinding parameters, which include

the angle of drill positioning cone angle (Ɵ) and the offset of the apex of the cone along y-axis known

as skew distance (S) and distance of the drill point to the apex of the cone (d).
To obtain the generic profiles, coordinates on a section of the fluted part were obtained. Using the
parameters listed below, the helix of sweep and revolution were obtained. The cutting lips and the
chisel edge were subsequently obtained.

Table 3.2 drill profile data.

Diameter = 15mm Web thickness = 2.1mm Pitch = 87.15mm

Length = 50mm S=2.5mm d = 10mm
o o
Point angle = 118 Helix angle = 30 Half Cone angle = 35o

The general procedure of modeling twist drill bit is:

1. Obtained the geometric and manufacturing parameters.
2. Draw the cross-section of the flute.
3. Create the solid flute by helical-extrusion
4. Locate the cone plane and vertices.
5. Draw the cone axes at these vertices and create a cone.
6. Use the cones to perform a Boolean-subtract cut to generate the flank surface of the drill
As solid modeling software get more powerful, it make sense to use powerful geometrical modeling
capabilities of these packages instead on relying on manually written equations and algorithms. Also it
would be easy to use this drill model in various different FEM packages. As modern software
packages can import open-standard solid models, it is very convenient to design the drill using
standard CAD technique so that it is in a format that can be converted in variety of platforms. This
approach is implemented in the CATIA V5 to build the solid model of the twist drill.
It is useful to first define a coordinate system that will serve through the analysis. The axis of the
system, x, y, z are described as follows:
x -axis – Parallel to the secondary cutting edge of the drill flank.
z- axis – Parallel to the axis of the drill
y- axis – Orthogonal to the x and z axes.
The flute is one of the most important features of the twist drill. The flute determines the cutting
forces and the core size that is very important for the cutting rigidity, and at the same time, it provide
passage for chip and evacuates them during machining. The cross-section of the drill has to be
designed such that it generates a straight secondary cutting edge when the flanks are ground. Hence,
the shape of the flute grinding wheel is dependent on the specifications of the drill that is being

23
ground. The cross-section of the flute may be divided into 8 sections as shown in the figure. Section
1, 2, 3 and 4 are unground parts of the drill blank and are arc which made make up a circle.

Figure 3.9 Flute Cross-Section

Section 5 and 6 can be described by the following polar equation:

2
w
w
ψ=sin−1 +
2r
r−

R
2 √ 2
( ) tan h
ρ
(3.1)

where, (r, ψ) are the necessary polar coordinates for the flute cross section creation, with r varying
from W/2 to D/2, W is the web thickness, h is the helix angle and ρ is the half-point angle. This polar
equation makes sure that the flank section produces a drill with straight cutting edge. Section 7 and 8
do not contribute much to the cutting performance of the drill and only need to be optimized to
provide rigidity. For simplicity, they can be modeled as symmetric to section 5 and 6, respectively.
For a twist drill of diameter of 15mm, the polar equation yields the following coordinates.

Table 3.3Coordinates of the cross-section of the flute profile of twist drill with a 15 mm diameter and
2.1 mm web thickness

X Y
0 1.0500
0.8402 1.0852
1.2635 1.1299
1.6337 1.8338
1.9800 1.2471
2.3125 1.3196
2.6356 1.4014
2.9517 1.4924
3.2620 1.5926
3.5673 1.7019
3.8681 1.8202

24
4.1646 1.9477
4.4568 2.0840
4.7449 2.2293
5.0288 2.3834
5.3084 2.5463
5.5836 2.7179
5.8544 2.8981
6.1206 3.0869
6.3821 3.2841
6.6387 3.4896

25
The flute cross-section is symmetric about both the x and the y axes. Hence, it suffices to just draw
one quadrant of the flute and mirror it about both axis. The quadrant of the flank section was
generated with the MATLAB function. The outer part of the cross-section in the quadrant is the arc of
the circle with the diameter of the drill. The flute cross-section is sweep along the helix to convert the
flute profile from 2D to a 3D boundary surface.

Figure 3.10 Flute Profile

For the helix angle of 30o the constant pitch length of the helix L is:
2 πr
L= (3.2)
tan δ
To create the solid flute body, the 2D section of the flute profile was swept-extruded about a helical
path. In order to define the helical path, pitch length ( L) is required which is calculated from the
equation (3.2).The value of the constant pitch length of the twist drill in this paper is 87.15mm. The
helix height is the same as the length of the drill flute.

Figure 3.11 Drill flute body

In general, the geometry of a twist drill tip includes the flank face and the chisel edge, which is the
intersection curve between the flank faces. The drill tip is a feature that significantly affects the drill

26
performance and life, so it is crucial to correctly construct the drill tip geometry in the solid model of
the cutter. The flank faces determine the cutting edge shape, the drill point angle, and the relief angle.
The chisel edge is found as the intersection between the flanks. The flanks are generated by taking a
swept-cut of a conical section around cone axis. We know that the grinding cone’s axis is located on a
plane parallel to the x-z plane at skew distance (S). Two separate planes were defined at offset
distance 2.5mm for two flank grinding operations and hence two grinding cones. After the grinding
cone is properly oriented, a conical flank can be grinded with the side of the cone in a path.

Figure 3.12 Skew Distance (S)

Figure 3.13Cone Profile

o
The half cone angle is 35 , and distance (d) is 10mm. The outer region of the flute volume intersected
by the cone surface is removed. In the grinding operation, the cone removes all the material from the
drill material from the drill outside of the cone. This operation is performed twice, once for each set of
cone grinding axes and the solid drill geometry is obtained.

27
 Figure 3.14 Twist drill bit

3.3 Defining Mesh Type.

Complex geometries such as drill must be imported from CAD system. The drill is imported to the Pre
– processor as .stl file and modeled as a rigid body. The .stl file should be a single, closed, watertight
surface. The imported geometry should be, one surface, no free edges, no invalid edges and no invalid
orientations. Due to the simple round nature of the work piece, it was modeled using geometric
primitives in DEFORM. The work piece were roughly 20% larger than the drill in thickness and
diameter. The thickness were large enough for the full engagement of tip taper. The meshing of the
drill and work piece are very critical in modeling the drilling process accurately. Several types of
meshes can be used in DEFORM. The two common FEM mesh types are Eulerian and
Lagrangian. The Eulerian method has a fixed mesh and the material flows through the mesh. The
nodes remain fixed and material points change position as the material deform. It is based on the
assumption of uniform chip thickness with no segmented or discontinuous chip formation. The mesh
deform with the material in Lagrangian method. Both the nodes and material point change position as
material deform. The chip is serrated in Ti machining, so Lagrangian formation is used to accurately
model the cutting process. Lagrangian mesh record the key variable at each time steps during the
simulation.
The drills and the work pieces are meshed with Langrangian mesh four nodes Tetrahedral. Since the
work piece is cut and deformed by the drill, it is modeled as a plastic body. A remeshing parameters is
required for automatic mesh regeneration during simulation as the work piece deformation proceed.
Sever deformation occurs at high strain rate and temperature in machining and the continuous
remeshing technique relieve the severe mesh distortion resulting from high strain rate plastic
deformation. In this paper a remeshing parameter was weighted toward high strain (>55%), high

28
strain rate (>30%) and high density mesh window (>20%).The new meshes are generated based on
user defined parameters to keep fine elements where they are needed for resolution, and place coarse
elements in other areas. The mesh density increases quickly and significantly at the start of cutting,
particularly at the tool cutting edge. This is because the work material deforms severely along tool
cutting edge. In DEFORM localize mesh refinement areas can be adjusted with the help of mesh
window to adjust maximum and minimum element size, and criteria for refining the mesh. The size
ratio sets the size of the largest elements, in areas where no refinement is required. For metal cutting
simulations, a size ratio of 10 is used. Larger size ratios may lead to substantial increases in the time
required for mesh generation while the simulation is running. For drilling, the minimum element size
of the work piece should be roughly ½ of the feed per cutting edge. (so ¼ the feed/revolution on a 2
flute drill). Generally 20,000-50,000 mesh elements were used to model the work piece. Greater
number of mesh elements increase the simulation time.
The tool mesh is not as critical as the work piece mesh. For a rigid object, the .stl geometry is always
maintained for deformation contact calculations. A finer mesh is used at the tip of the drill in a 3:1
ratio. The mesh is only used for temperature calculations. We defined a 20,000 element mesh,
weighted towards the cutting lip.

Figure 4.15 Mesh setup

3.4 Assigning Material and Boundary Condition

Material data are required for the tool and work piece to use the equation of FEM model. DEFORM-
3D has built in material library. The library consist of vast catalogue of machining metals and alloys.
Material model for the work piece and the tool were developed from the built in material library. The
materials were assigned to the mesh. The work piece was assigned Ti-6Al-4V_machining from the
material library whereas the tool is assigned high speed steel. The drill is modeled to be a rigid object
that does not deform during the drilling process. Consequently tool wear and thermal damage to the
drill are not considered. The edges of work piece are fixed in all directions. The heat exchange with
environment were also defined. The drill was given rotational velocity (rad/sec) and feed rate
(mm/sec).

29
 Figure 4.16 Boundary condition

Figure 4.17 Material library

30
3.5 Contact

The contact conditions control the friction, heat transfer and master-slave relationships between the
tool and work piece. Generating initial contact conditions can identify potential geometry problems,
and improve the initial calculations. After a simulation is running, the program updates contact
conditions automatically. The Contact BCC function finds any modes on the slave objet that are
within the tolerance distance of the master, and assigns a contact condition to them. The tool was set
to be the master object and the work piece was the slave object, which allows the work piece to
deform according to the tool movement. An addition master-slave relationship is set up between the
work piece and itself. This is set so that chips that are generated cannot flow back into the materials. A
friction coefficient of 0.55 was used. Heat transfer coefficient was 10 N/sec/mm/C.

Figure 4.18 Contact

3.6 Movement and Simulation Controls

The movement of the tool is controlled by assigning the translation and rotational movement. The
rotational speed must be defined in radian/sec, and translational speed must be defined in mm/sec. For
a simulation, with angular velocity of 1911 rpm translates to the rotational seed 1911*2*3.1415/60 =
200.11 rad/sec. And feed rate of 0.06 mm/rev translate to axial velocity of 0.06*1911 = 1.911 mm/sec.
The velocity of the work piece has to be strained in order to prevent its movement during the
simulation.
The numerical parameters for running the simulation are defined under simulation control. Several
simulation parameters can be changed to achieve different results. In DEFORM, the deformation is
subdivided into hundreds or thousands of incremental time steps. The time steps needs to large
enough for the tools to go through the work piece. It is usually determine by the mesh size. Smaller
time steps require smaller time steps. The user defined time step give the simulation a starting point
for calculations. If it is too large, the simulation module will automatically reduce it to a more suitable
value. Roughly 300 steps per revolution was used to have 1 degree of rotation per time step. If the
drill makes 1911 rev/min, which mean 1 revolution takes about 60/1911 of a sec. (60/1911)/300 gives
a time step of 0.0001 seconds per step. Constant Time Increment value of 0.0001was assigned. The

31
work piece is 1.5mm thick. At 1.911 mm/sec, the time of machining is 0.785s, which corresponds to
nearly 7000 steps to completely drill this work piece.

Figure 4.19 Movement and simulation control

After the tool-work piece models are created and meshed, materials are assigned, boundary-
movement-contact conditions are set, simulation parameters are specified, database of the simulation
can be generated. The Database name will be same as the one specified when the problem is opened.
Variation of the problem can be created using different names. DEFORM will mark errors with red
circles. This indicates a situation which will not allow the situation to run. The user must return to the
preprocessor and correct the situation before continuing. DEFORM makes sure that all key
parameters were input correctly and then generates a .DB file to run the simulation.

Figure 4.20 Database generation

While a simulation is running, DEFORM rename the database file to FOR003. This file can be opened
in the postprocessor like any other database file. However, while the simulation is running, the last
step may change. If the user tries to view the last step after it has changed, the post-processor will

32
crash. It will not cause data loss. Occasionally it may stop the simulation. If the simulations stops, it
can be resumed with the Continue button. To post-process a simulation that is running, post-processor
should be opened. If the problem does not load automatically, it can be done by typing “FOR003” in
the file open window.
The DEFORM post-processor is used to view and extract data such as material flow characteristics,
work piece temperature, stress, strain and strain rate from the simulation results in the database file.
The Force and torque are available and can be viewed as graph plots. The information are available at
each time step. DEFORM also generates short films of the tool-work piece interaction during the
simulation.
All results steps which are saved by the simulation engine are available in the post-processor.
Information which is available from the post-processor includes:
1. Deformed geometry, including tool movements and deformed mesh at each saved step.
2. Contour plots: line or shaded contours display the distribution of any state variables, including
stress, strain, temperature, damage and others.
3. Vector plots: displacement and velocity vectors indicate magnitude and direction of displacement
of velocity for every node at each step throughout the process.
4. Graph of key variables such as press load, volumes, and point traced state variables.
5. Point tracking to show how material moves and plots of state variables at these points.
6. Flow net showing material flow patterns on a uniform grid. Generally a very good predictor of
grain flow patterns in the finished part.
7. State variables can be tracked between any two points and plotted in a graph format. The state
variables can either follow the boundary or linearly between the points.
8. A histogram plot of any state variables can be made to view the distribution of any given state
variable throughout a body.
Damage specifies the damage factor at each element. The damage factor increase as a material is
deformed. Damage generally relates to the likely hood of fracture in a part. The default damage model
in DEFORM is Cockroft – Latham damage model. The damage value at which material failure
initiates varies substantially from material to material and can even vary for a given material with
different annealing treatments. Fracture occurs when the damage factor has reached its critical value.
The critical value of damage factor must be determined through physical experimentation. Damage
factor, D f is defined by
σ¿
Df = ∫ dϵ (4.1)
σ
Where,
σ ¿ is the tensile maximum principal stress, σ is the effective stress, and dϵ is the effective strain
increment.
Strain is the measure of degree of deformation. Due to the large amount of deformation in machining
operation, DEFORM include true strain, which is the sum of large series of small strain increments.

lf
ϵ = ln (4.2)
l0

33
where ϵ is the true strain,l 0is the initial length, and l f is the final length.
Strain rate is a measure of the rate of deformation with respect to time. The units are strain per second
where strain is a dimensionless value. The components of strain rate are defined in the same manner
as the component of strain.
Stress is defined as the force acting per unit area of a material. DEFORM use von Mises stress to
define the characteristic “effective stress”. The effective stress is defined as σ
1 2 2 2
σ=
√2
√
( σ 1−σ 2 ) −( σ 2−σ 3 ) −( σ 3−σ 1 ) (4.3)

For most metal effective stress is the onset of plastic flow.

34
 Chapter 4 DRILLING SETUP AND EXPERIMENTS

This chapter present the CAD modeling of drill bit, experimental set up, experimental tools, materials
and results of drilling experiments. Experiments of the drilling operation in this paper involves the
study of drilling force and torque, with a convention high speed twist drill and carbide drill on a plate
of titanium alloy. The drilling experiments were conducted in the machining lab at University with
High-speed 5-axis CNC milling machine (TH5660A). The work piece is a titanium alloy Ti6Al4V of
thickness of 5mm. Altogether 27 through holes were drilled with three different tool diameters (nine
holes per tool) in a dry condition.

4.1 Experiment Setup

Drilling experiments in this paper were conduct with high speed 5-axis CNC milling machine ( 常州
机床-TH5660A) available in research lab at UNIVERSITY.

Figure 3.21 Five-axis CNC Milling Machine (常州机床-TH5660A)

The work holding fixture is shown in Figure 3.8. The work piece was mounted on the dynamometer.

35
 Figure 3.22 Work holding fixture

A fixed-plate dynamometer was used to record the cutting forces components (FX, FY, FZ).

Figure 3.23 Fixed-plate dynamometer

The dynamometer data was passed through an amplifier and centralized on a computer using the
DynoWare-Data Acquisition software.

36
 Figure 3.24 Data acquisition setup

The material used in this research is Ti6Al4V alloy bar (5mm).

4.2 Tools and Work piece

Figure 3.25Work piece and tools

Characteristics and mechanical properties of work-piece

Chemical composition of Ti6Al4V wt.%
Aluminum, Al 5.5~6.8

37
 Vanadium, V 3.5~4.5
Carbon, C ≤0.10
Iron, Fe ≤0.30
Oxygen, O ≤0.20
Nitrogen, N ≤0.05
Hydrogen, H ≤0.015
Titanium, Ti balance

Physical - mechanical properties of Ti6Al4V.

Property Typical Value
Density 4.42 g/cm3
Melting Range °C±15°C 1649°C
Specific Heat 560 J/kg.°C
Thermal Conductivity 7.2 W/m.K
Mean Co-Efficient of Thermal Expansion 0-
8.6x10-6
100°C /°C
Yield Strength 900 MPa
Tensile Strength 1000 MPa
Modulus of Elasticity 114 GPa
Rockwell Hardness 36 HRC

Three twist drills were used in the experiment. These tools are made by M.A.FORD. Two of the
tools are general purpose high speed steel (HSS) drill and one is high performance solid carbide stub
drill. The two HSS drill are namely t1 and t2. The tool t1 has 5mm diameter and the tool t 2 has 10 mm
diameter. Both the HSS drills have 118° point angle and 21° helix angle. The solid carbide stub
drill namely t3 has 14 mm diameter. It has 142° point angle and 30° helix angle.

Figure 3.26 Tools

The following table summarizes the experimental setup:

38
 Table3.1 summery of experimental setup

Machine-tool High-speed 5-axis CNC milling machine (常州籍床-TH5660A)

Fixed-plate dynamometer (Kistler)
Force measurement
Acquisition cable
equipment
Signal amplifier
Data acquisition
DynoWare 2.5.3.8 Type 2825D-02
software
Work-piece Titanium alloy (Ti 6Al-4V) 180*100*5
Twister XD 3X Solid Carbide Stub Drill ø14mm (M.A.FORD) Xtreme
Drill t3 High Performance Drilling board range of materials.
Tool number – 2XDSS5512A
Twister GP 3X Drill ø10mm (M.A.FORD)
Drill t2
Tool number - 22639370
Twister GP 3X Drill ø5mm (M.A.FORD)
Drill t1
Tool number – 22619680

The final experimental setup is presented in Figures 3.27.

Figure 3.28 Hole configuration on work piece

The aim of the experiment presented is to measure the cutting forces: thrust and torque, during
drilling process, from tool entry to full engagement and tool exit from the work piece material. The
thrust force and torque value vary during these different stages of drilling. We can relate this
variation with the time variable and knowing the axial feed, we can easily translate these curve from
the time coordinate to the radial distance. The raw experimental date provides time variation of both
thrust and torque. When full engagement happens during the drilling process, the value of thrust
and torque remains constant during the time interval. Their average values cab be extracted on the
time frame of full engagement and the maximum thrust and torque values for a set of experimental
conditions can be obtained. By correlating the time curves of thrust and torque during tool entry with
the drill geometry, we can also determine the variation of the forces with radial engagement. The
derivative of these curves will provide the distribution of the elementary forces along the tool radius.

39
The aim of the experiment is to measure the following parameters.
Maximum thrust [N]
Maximum torque [N*mm]
Thrust/time curve: Thrust (t[s])
Torque/time curve: Torque (t[s])
Experiments were carried out with multiple sets of cutting parameters. 9 sets of spindle speed and 3
sets of feed variation for each spindle speed were experimented, resulting in total of 27 different
cutting conditions. The experiments were carried on a dry condition. Previous published results [17]
shows that the maximum thrust and torque value increased by 20% after more than 20 holes drilled
with the same tool. Only nine holes were drilled per tool and the tools were not changed during the
experiment. The factors which influence the cutting forces in drilling are presented in the following
table.

Table 3.2 Parameters influencing the cutting force measurements in drilling

Geometrical parameters
The geometry of drill is complex. It is be
Geometry of the drill bit describe by various sets of parameters, such as:
drill diameter, point angle, Web thickness, rake
angle, relief angle and number of flutes.
The thickness of the work-piece and its
Work-piece geometry
geometrical configuration (i.e. existence of pilot
Thickness
holes, cut-out, inclined holes, variable thickness,
Pilot hole
etc.) influence the variation of the cutting
Spot
forces.
Fixture configuration influence the noise levels
Fixture configuration
in the force measurements and the vibration.

Material properties
The machinability is a combination of factors
which is material dependent. It is usually
Work piece material machinability quantified as specific cutting pressure (KC)
determined directly from machining
experiments.
Depends on the tool-work piece combination
Tool/work piece friction coefficient and cutting conditions, represented by the
friction coefficient (Kf)

Cutting conditions
Feed directly influence the depth of cut and the
Feed
uncut chip area.

40
 The influence of the speed extends mostly upon
the material properties. It also influences the
Spindle speed
noise in cutting forces measurements and
vibration levels.
Liquids are used to cool the tool/work-piece.
Coolant/lubricant usage They affect the temperature field, but also lower
the friction coefficient.

Table 3.3 Cutting parameters

Feed per rotational Peripheral
Tool Spindle Hole
revolution Feed rate speed cutting speed MRR
diameter speed (n- numbe
(f[mm/rev]) (mm/min) (rad/sec) (m/min) (mm3/min)
d(mm) [r/min]) r

5-1 0.06 38.22 750.42

637 5-2 0.04 25.48 66.7045 10.005 500.28
5-3 0.02 12.74 250.14
5-4 0.06 76.44 1500.85
5 (t1) 1274 5-5 0.04 50.96 133.4090 20.011 981.68
5-6 0.02 25.48 500.17
5-9 0.06 114.66 2250.77
1911 5-8 0.04 76.44 200.11355 30.017 1500.85
5-7 0.02 38.22 750.25
10-1 0.06 19.14 1503.20
319 10-2 0.04 12.76 33.40 10.02 1002.04
10-3 0.02 6.38 501.02
10-4 0.06 38.28 3006.12
10(t2) 638 10-5 0.04 25.52 66.80 20.04 2004.08
10-6 0.02 12.76 1002.04
10-9 0.06 57.42 4509.19
957 10-8 0.04 38.28 100.21 30.62 3006.12
10-7 0.02 19.14 1503.06
14(t3) 14-1 0.06 13.62 2096.6
227 14-2 0.04 9.08 23.77 9.98 1397.7
14-3 0.02 4.54 698.85
14-4 0.06 27.24 4193.1
454 14-5 0.04 18.16 47.54 19.96 2795.4
14-6 0.02 9.08 1397.7
681 14-9 0.06 40.86 71.312 29.95 6289.7
14-8 0.04 27.24 4193.1

41
 14-7 0.02 16.62 2558.4

4.3 Experimental Analysis

Figure 3.14 Three stages of drilling (1, 2 and 3)

Figure3.14 presents the three stages of drilling marked as 1, 2, and 3. Stage 1 occurs when the drill
has traveled a distance d, which is the drill point length, from the tip. For the tool t 1, t2, and t3, d is
equal to 1.29, 2.76 and 2.5mm respectively. The drill cutting lips becomes fully engaged with the
work piece at the stage 1. The drill tip reaches the back surface of the work piece at the stage 2. At the
stage 3 the cutting lips is disengaged with the work piece.

If t1and t2 are the two time instances defined in the full engagement stage, t1< t2. We can extract the
value Fz1, Fz2, Mz1, and Mz2. Fz1 and Mz1 (Fz2 and Mz2 respectively) correspond to the total thrust and
torque caused by the cutting process of the cutting edges for the drill engaged up to a height of h 1 (h2)
and radius r1 and r2 into the work-piece. h1 and h2 can be calculated using equation 3.9 based on the
cutting parameters, while r1 and r2 can be obtained by tracing the tool profile graphs.
For the resulting element of the cutting lip segment defined by the points (r 1, h1) and (r2, h2), we can
calculate the fees (Fz) and tangential (Fy) forces acting on it, using the following equations:

F z [ ( r 1 , h1 ) , ( r 2 , h 2) ]=F z 2−F Z 1(3.3)

42
 Mz2 Mz1
F y [ ( r 1 , h1 ) , ( r 2 , h2 ) ]= - (3.4)
r2 r1
For our analysis we can calculate the normalized (per unit length) value of the feed and tangential
forces on the selected cutting lip element along the r and h direction.

∂ Fz [(r 1 , h1) ,(r 2 ,h 2)] Fz [ ( r 1, h 1 ) , ( r 2 , h 2 ) ]

= (3.5)
∂r r 2−r 1

∂ Fz [(r 1 , h1) ,(r 2 ,h 2)] Fz [ ( r 1, h 1 ) , ( r 2 , h 2 ) ]

= (3.6)
∂h h 2−h1

∂ Fy [(r 1 , h1) ,(r 2 , h2)] Fy [ ( r 1, h 1 ) , ( r 2 , h 2 ) ]

= (3.7)
∂r r 2−r 1

∂ Fy [(r 1 , h1) ,(r 2 , h2)] Fy [ ( r 1, h 1 ) , ( r 2 , h 2 ) ]

= (3.8)
∂h h2−h1
Equations 3.6 and 3.8 give the average distribution of elementary axial and tangential cutting force
per unit length acting on each element of the cutting lip along the radius and height respectively, from
the tool tip.As drilling forces influence most of the drilling parameters, great deal of Information
about the drilling process can be extracted by the measurement of cutting forces, more specifically the
cutting forces distribution along the drill radius.The time axis on thrust and torque curves can be
easily related to the height of the tool engaged in drilling, by knowing the feed rate:
He = fr .t[mm] (3.9)
By using the tool profiles, the radial engagement at a point in time coinciding with the vertical
engagement can also be determined.

43
 Figure 3.15 Tool profile t1

Figure 3.16 Tool profile t2

44
Figure 3.17 Tool profile t3

45
 Figure 3.18 Thrust and Torque (Titanium alloy, 5 mm thickness, tool t3 ø14mm n=227rpm,
f=0.04mm/rev)

The drilling stages presented in figure 3.19 is based on t 3’s geometry. The thrust and torque force are
the function drilling depth. The time to reach stage 1, 2 and 3 is 22.57, 17.62 and 14.42 s respectively
at cutting speed of 9980 mm/min and feed rate of 9.08 mm/min .The drill gets fully engaged on the
work piece at stage 1. The stage 2 represents the interval between the initiation of full engagement
until the drill start to exit the work piece. Stage 3 represent the drill exiting the work piece.
Stage 1 can further be observed as the engagement of the chisel edge and engagement of the main
cutting lips. The chisel edge engagement interval is 6.6s also marked inside the stage 1. The thrust
force increased sharply during the engagement of chisel edge while the torque increase much slower.

46
The value of thrust and torque remains almost constant for the full engagement phase. The maximum
thrust is usually obtained at the point when the tool makes full engagement for the first time as seen in
the figure 3.15. During the full engagement, the reaming forces (cutting with the side of the drill) add
up to the measurements. The geometry and the cutting configuration in the reaming zone generate low
elementary forces and particularly oriented in the in the tangential direction. The tangential
elementary forces at this point have a noticeable effect on torque measurements as they are multiplied
by the maximum possible arm. The thrust force is usually decreasing during the stage 2 due to the
deformation of the uncut work piece, which becoming thinner, is easier to deform. Also for smaller
tool diameters, the torque is small. The thrust force and torque gradually decreases during the stage 3
as the drill exit the work piece.

47
 Chapter 5 EXPERIMENTAL AND SIMULATION RESULTS

5.1 Experimental Results

For titanium drilling, a lower cutting parameters are usually favorable. The fact is that the greater
cutting parameters elevates the machining temperature and titanium is harder to machine at elevated
temperature due to the strain hardening effect. Which cause the rapid wear of the tool. For a tool of
diameter less than 5mm, maximum recommended feed is 0.08mm. Relatively lower feed and spindle
speed were chosen to carry out the experiments, presented in this paper. However, recent high-through
drilling research [17], found the optimum tool life at the feed larger than the recommended value. Three
tools were experimented in this paper. For each tool t1, t 2, and t3, 3 sets of spindle speed and 3 sets of
feed with each spindle speed were tested, total of 9 hole per tool and 27 number of total holes during
the whole experiment. For the tool t 1, spindle speed of 637, 1247, and 1911 rpm were tested. For the
tool t2, spindle speed of 319, 638, and 957 rpm were tested. For the tool t3, spindle speed of 227, 454
and 618 were tested. The feeds were 0.02, 0.04 and 0.06 mm/rev.

Table 5.1 Experimental thrust force and torque

Experimental Experimental
Tool Spindle Feed per Thrust force Torque
Hole
diameter speed（n- revolution Experiment Experiment
number
d（mm） [r/min]） (f[mm/rev]) Thrust Torque
[N] [Nm]
0.06 5-1 395 1.25
637 0.04 5-2 331 0.769
0.02 5-3 247 0.52
0.06 5-4 364 1.141
5 (t1) 1274 0.04 5-5 301 1.005
0.02 5-6 219 0.93
0.06 5-7 352 1.062
1911 0.04 5-8 289 1.387
0.02 5-9 214 1.42
10(t2) 0.06 10-1 905 4.332
319 0.04 10-2 743 3.423
0.02 10-3 533 2.12
638 0.06 10-4 848 2.57
0.04 10-5 719 2.41

48
 0.02 10-6 512 3.002
0.06 10-7 827 6.505
957 0.04 10-8 734 6.33
0.02 10-9 485 6.21
0.06 14-1 2441 8.090
227 0.04 14-2 2145 6.674
0.02 14-3 1736 6.047
0.06 14-4 2409 10.98
14(t3) 454 0.04 14-5 2124 9.439
0.02 14-6 1556 6.573
0.06 14-7 2324 11.07
681 0.04 14-8 1937 9.478
0.02 14-9 1419 6.202

49
 Figure 3.21 Experimental thrust force and torque sample tool-t3 14-2

50
5.2 Effect of Feed

A constant rise in thrust force and torque is visible with the increase of feed. For instance, for the tool
t1, a constant spindle speed 637 rpm and feeds of 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 mm/rev results in the thrust
force of 247, 331, and 395 N respectively. For the tool t 2, a constant spindle speed 319 rpm and feeds
of 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 mm/rev results in the thrust force of 533, 743, and 905 N respectively. For the
tool t3, a constant spindle speed 227 rpm and feeds of 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 mm/rev results in the thrust
force of 1736, 2145 and 2441 N respectively. For the tool t 3, a constant spindle speed 319 rpm and
feeds of 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 mm/rev results in the thrust force of 1736, 2145 and 2441 N. The main
reason for the increase in the thrust force is the increase in the amount of the work piece to be
deformed in the form of chip , which is the mechanism by which cutting in drilling happens. Similar
trend of rise in thrust force, with the increase of feed rate follows for all the feed rates in this paper.
The maximum amount of thrust force at the tool t 1 is 395 N resulted by the feed of 0.06 mm/rev and
spindle speed of 637 rpm. The maximum amount of thrust force at the tool t2 is 905 N resulted by the
feed of 0.06 mm/rev and spindle speed of 319 rpm. The maximum amount of thrust force at the tool t 1
is 2441N resulted by the feed of 0.06 mm/rev and spindle speed of 227 rpm. The maximum rise in
thrust force rises by more than was 10%, 15%, and 25% when the feed was increased from 0.02 to
0.04 mm/rev, 0.04 to 0.06 mm/rev and 0.02 to 0.06 mm/rev respectively.
For the tool t1, a constant spindle speed 637 rpm and feeds of 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 mm/rev results in
the torque of 1.25, 0.769, 0.52 Nm respectively. . For the tool t 2, a constant spindle speed 319 rpm and
feeds of 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 mm/rev results in the torque of 4.33, 3.42 and 2.12 Nm respectively. For
the tool t3, a constant spindle speed 227 rpm and feeds of 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06 mm/rev results in the
torque of 8.09, 6.67 and 6.04 Nm respectively.

5.3 Effect of Spindle Speed

Some previous studies indicates slight rise in thrust force with the increase in spindle speed and few
researchers were unclear of the effect of spindle speed. The test in this paper shows a slight decrease
in thrust force with the increase in spindle speed. The torque increased with the spindle speed but was
not uniform. There might be other factor in play for these variation. The slight decrease in thrust force
in this paper might be due to the relative ease of chip evacuation at higher spindle speed. For instance,
for the tool t1, a constant feed of 0.06 mm/rev and spindle speed of 637, 1274, and 1911 rpm results
in the thrust force of 413, 389, and 369 N respectively. For the tool t2, for a constant feed 0.04
mm/rev and spindle seed of 637, 1274, and 1911 rpm results in the thrust force of 347, 337, and 321 N
respectively. For the tool t3, for a constant feed 0.02 mm/rev and spindle seed of 637, 1274, and 1911
rpm results in the thrust force of 265, 240, and 225 N respectively. The thrust force decreased by 5%,
5% and 10% when the spindle speed was increased from 637 to 1274 rpm, 1274 to 1911 rpm and 637
to 1911 rpm respectively.
For the tool t1, a constant feed of 0.06 mm/rev and spindle speed of 637, 1274, and 1911 rpm results
in the torque of 1.25. 1.14 and 1.06. Nm respectively. For the tool t2, for a constant feed 0.04 mm/rev

51
and spindle seed of 637, 1274, and 1911 rpm results in the torque of 0.76, 1.005 and 1.38 Nm
respectively. For the tool t3, for a constant feed 0.02 mm/rev and spindle seed of 637, 1274, and 1911
rpm results in the torque of 0.05, 0.93 and 1.42 Nm respectively. For the tool t3, increase of torque
with the spindle speed is uniform, however for the tool t2 and t3, the rise of torque is not uniform.

5.4 Radial Distribution of Cutting Forces

Figure 5.29 Radial Distribution of thrust force along the cutting lip of t1

Figure 5.30 Radial distribution of thrust force along the cutting lip of t 2

52
 Figure 5.31 Radial distribution of thrust force along the cutting lip of t 3

Figures present the radial distribution of the elementary thrust forces along the flutes of the 2-facet
twist drill obtained from the experiment. As the cutting edges of this drill has only 2 segments (chisel
edge and cutting lip) only 2 drilling stages are noted, marked by vertical lines (stage 1 and stage 2).
Stage 1 represents the whole chisel edge where are stage 2 represents the main cutting lips. The main
cutting lips is subdivided into elements for which the drilling forces are measured. It is noted that the
radial distribution of the elementary cutting forces are expected to be discontinuous function, as from
one stage to another the geometry of the element (rake angle, inclination angle) and the angle of
decomposition along the axial and tangential direction (point angle, inclination angle) are changing
sharply. As expected, we the load concentration (for both axial and tangential forces) was on the chisel
edge. The thrust force at the beginning of the second stage seems to increase due to the change in
point angle, rake angle and inclination angle. The spindle speed seems to have little effect on the axial
force. Feed rate seems to have clear and almost linear influence on both the axial and tangential
forces. At low feed rates, the load concentration seems to occur as expected on the chisel edge.
However, as the feed rate increases, the load at the beginning of second stage increases more rapidly.
The cutting is less efficient in the vicinity of the transition point from stage 1 to 2 mainly due to the
highly negative rake angle. It is also observed that the carbide drill performed better than HSS drill
during the drilling of titanium alloy.

5.5 FEM Results

The results of FEM simulation carried out with the tool t 1 and t2 are presented in this paper. Drilling
simulation in DEFORM are time consuming. Particular number of revolutions of a drills are required
to establish characteristic behavior. Feed rates determines the minimum mesh element size required to
model the simulation accurately. The chips are meshed according to the remising criteria. More the
number of mesh elements, computationally intensive the simulation became.

53
 Figure 5.32Tool and Work pieceFEM mesh (time = 0 sec)

Figure 5.33 FEM Simulation model in progress (time = 0.549 sec)

54
 Figure 5.34 Chip mesh of deformed work piece generated by DEFORM. (2.937 sec)

A sample plot of state variables of a drilling simulation for the feed rate 30.62mm/min and cutting
speed 38.28 m/min and material removal rate 3006.12 mm 3/min is shown in figure 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 5.10
and 5.11. These state variables are not studied in detail in this paper.

Figure 5.35 Damage

55
 Figure 5.36 Strain

Figure 5.37 Strain rate

56
 Figure 5.38 Principal stress

Figure 5.39 Temperature

The FEM results are similar to that of the experiment i.e. constant rise in thrust force and torque is
visible with the increase of feed. For instance, for the tool t 1, a constant spindle speed 637 rpm and
feeds of 0.04 and 0.06 mm/rev results in the thrust force of 347 and 413 N respectively. For the tool t 2,
a constant spindle speed 319 rpm and feeds of 0.04, and 0.06 mm/rev results in the thrust force of 754,
and 929 N respectively.
Figure5.12 and Figure 5.13 Presents a sample of thrust force and torque measurement of FEM model

57
for the spindle speed 957 rpm and feed rate 0.04 mm/rev. The thrust force and torque resulted by the
FEM model is 749 N and 7.38 Nm respectively. The thrust force and torque resulted by the
experiment test for same sets of cutting condition is 734 N and 6.33 Nm respectively. The maximum
amount of thrust is resulted at feed rate 0.06 mm/rev and lower spindle speed 319 mm/rev for tool t 2.
The value is 929 N for FEM model and 905 N for Experimental test. The maximum amount of torque
is also resulted at feed rate 0.06 mm/rev but higher spindle speed at 957 mm/rev.

Figure 5.40 FEM Thrust force graph

Figure 5.41 FEM Torque graph

58
5.6 Comparison of FEA and Experimental Results

Table5.2 FEM and Experimental Thrust force and torque value.

Feed per FEM Experiment

Tool FEM Experiment
Spindle speed revolution Thrust Thrust
diameter Torque Torque
[r/min] (f[mm/rev]) [N] [N]
（mm） [Nm] [Nm]

0.06 413 1.42 395 1.25

637
0.04 347 0.87 331 0.769
0.06 389 1.29 364 1.141
5 (t1) 1274
0.04 337 1.2 301 1.005
0.06 369 1.14 352 1.062
1911
0.04 321 1.49 289 1.387
0.06 929 4.94 905 4.332
319
0.04 751 3.30 743 3.423
0.06 855 2.92 848 2.57
10(t2) 638
0.04 739 2.74 719 2.41
0.06 848 7.89 827 6.505
957
0.04 749 7.38 734 6.33

Table 5.2 presents the amount the average thrust force and torque magnitude, resulted from FEM
model and obtained for experimental test. The FEM thrust and torque was also found to increase with
the feed rate. Though the FEM results were close to the experimental value The FEM model over
predicted the thrust force and torque. The highest difference between the FEM prediction and
Experiment results for thrust force is 10% and for the torque is 18%.
Figure 5.14 and 5.15 presents the FEM vs Experimental thrust force at the tool t 2 for a sets of spindle
speed and feed rate respectively. FEM model over predict the thrust and torque but the results agrees
well with the experimental value. From the figure, the influence of feed is more prominent than the
spindle speed on the thrust force.

59
 Figure 5.42 Effect of spindle speed on thrust force (Tool t2)

Figure 5.43 Effect of feed rate on the thrust force (Tool t2)

Figure 5.16 and 5.17 presents the FEM vs Experimental torque for a sets of spindle speed and feed
rate respectively.

60
Figure 5.44 Effect of spindle speed on the torque (Tool t1)

Figure 5.45 Effect of feed rate on the torque (Tool t1)

61
 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION

6.1 Conclusion

The objective of this thesis was to develop FEM model, to simulate the dynamics and kinematics of
a drilling process of titanium alloy with a conventional twist drill to study the influence of the cutting
parameters on the drilling thrust force and torque magnitude. The drilling process Ti6Al4V titanium
alloy was examined by using FEM model and verified experimentally. A thermo mechanically
coupled 3D Finite element model which incorporate complex tool geometry, constitutive models
appropriate for high strain rate, and process parameter was modeled. The model provides good
estimation of thrust force and overestimated the torque. The thrust force increases with the feed.
The lower spindle speed results in the greater amount of thrust. Feed rates have rather greater
influence on the thrust force than the spindle speed. The combination of greater feed rate and lower
spindle speed results in the maximum amount of thrust. However, combination of greater feed rate
and spindle speed resulted in maximum amount of torque.
The computer based FEM model proved to promising tool, efficient enough for the simulation of
drilling process with greater accuracy, which eliminates the need of labor intensive and time
consuming experimental testing. This will facilitate the rapid design of drill and will also predict its
cutting forces using FEM model.
Using parametric curves and surfaces functions of CAD system, geometrical model of twist drill of
diameter 5mm and 10mm is modeled and used in the FEA simulation. Drilling experiments of
titanium alloy Ti6Al4V are also conducted. Taking the speed and feed as the process variables, a set of
simulation and experimental cutting forces are obtained and compared. Good agreement was found
between the experimental and FEM results. The highest difference between the FEM prediction and
experiment results for thrust force was 10% and for the torque was 18%. Factors such as material
model, mesh model, contact properties such as friction, boundary conditions are the cause of the
difference for the experimental and FEM results and are the topic of continuous research. . The lower
spindle speed resulted in the greater amount of thrust. Feed rates have greater influence on the thrust
force than the spindle speed. The combination of greater feed rate and lower spindle speed results in
the maximum amount of thrust. However, combination of greater feed rate and spindle speed resulted
in maximum amount of torque.

62
 The study shows the FEM model of drilling is able to predict changes in thrust force and torque
with respect to drilling process parameters.

6.2 Recommendation

1. Thermo-mechanically coupled Lagrangian FEM model of the drilling process of Titanium alloy
was developed in this thesis. Lagrangian model enables the continuous remeshing as the chip
deformation continue, but the main drawback of this model is the mesh distortion. By using newly
developed Advance Lagrangian Eularian (ALE) formulation simulations can be run efficiently
compared to Lagrangian model.
2. The drill was modeled to be a rigid body that does not deform during the drilling process.
Consequently tool wear and thermal damage to the drill are not considered. To simulate these effects,
drill could be modeled as plastic body.
3. The effects of noise and vibration could also be included.
4. Simulation could be performed on a spotted or center-drilled work piece. The spot improve the
simulation time as the material doesn’t needs to be removed by the drill.
5. Low feed rates between 0.02 to 0.06 mm/rev were tested. The number of holes per tool were also
low. Greater feed and more number of holes could be tested to increase productivity.

63
References

64
1

[]
E.J.A. Armarego, R.H. Brown, (1969), THE MACHINING OF METALS.
2

[]
E.J.A. Armarego, C.Y. Cheng (1972), Drilling with flat rake face and conventional twist drill-I, theoretical
investigation, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacturing 12.
3

[]
E.J.A. Armarego, C.Y. Cheng (1972), Drilling with flat rake face and conventional twist drill-I, experimental
investigation, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacturing 12.
4

[]
E.J.A. Armarego, S. Wiriyacosol (1972), Thrust and torque prediction in drilling from a cutting mechanics
approach, Annals of CIRP 28 (1979) 88-91.
5

[]
M.C. Shaw, Metal Cutting Principles, third ed., M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass, 1945.
6

[]
C.J. Oxford, (1955), The drilling of metals I-basic mechanics of the process, Transactions of ASME 77 (1955)
103-114.
7

[]
M.E. Merchant, (1944), Basic mechanics of the metal cutting process. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 86:119-130.
8

[]
M.C. Shaw, (1984), Metal Cutting Principles, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.
9

[]
M.C. Shaw, N.H. Cook, P.A. Smith (1952), The mechanics of three-dimensional cutting operations. Transactions
of the ASME, 74: 1055-1064.
10

[]
V. Chandraseharan, S.G. Kapoor, R.E. DeVor, A mechanistic model to predict the cutting force system for
arbitrary drill point geometry, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 120 (1998) 563-570.
11

[]
V. Chandraseharan, S.G. Kapoor, R.E. DeVor, A mechanistic model to predict the cutting force system for
arbitrary drill point geometry, S.M. Wu Symposium, 2 (1996) 108-114.

12

[]
V. Chandraseharan, S.G. Kapoor, R.E. DeVor, A mechanistic approach to predicting the cutting forces in drilling:
with application to fiber reinforced composite materials, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 117
(1995) 559-570.
13

[]
Y. Gong, K.F. Ehmann, Mechanistic model for dynamic forces in micro-drilling, Proceeding of 2001 ASME
international Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Nov. 11-16, 2001, NY, MED-23302 (2001).
14

[]
J.S. Strenkowski, C.C. Hsieh, A.J. Shih (2004). An analytical finite element technique for predicting thrust force
and torque in drilling. International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 1413–1421
15
[]
X. Yang, and C.R. Liu (1999), Machining titanium and its alloys, Machining Science and Technology, Vol. 3, pp.
107-113.
16

[]
E.O. Ezugwu, Z.M. Wang (1998), Titanium alloys and their machinability, A review, Journal of Material
Processing Technology, Vol. 68, pp. 262-274.
17

[]
Rui Li, Parag Hegde, Albert J. Shih. (2006), High-throughput drilling of titanium alloys, International Journal of
Machining Tools & Manufacture 47 (2007) 63-74.
18

[]
J. Yang, S. Sun, M. Brandit, W. Yan. (2011), 3D Finite Element Modeling of Machining of Ti6Al4V Alloys,
Advanced Materials Research Vols. 189-193 pp 1926-1929.
19

[]
J. Yang, S. Sun. (2009), Finite element modelling and simulation of drilling of titanium alloy. Inf. and Comp. Sci,
ICIC ’09. Second Int Conf. 4, 178
20

[]
Lin. X, Ni. J, Drill design for high throughput hole making, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Xian, China, June 16-18, 1999, pp. 162-166.
21

[]
Sakurai, k., Adachi, K., Ogawa, K., Niba, R. (1992), Drilling of Ti6Al4V Alloy . J. Jpn. Inst. Light Met, 42(7): p.
389-394.
22

[]
B. Klamecki (1973), Incipient Chip Formation in Metal Cutting – A Three Dimensional Element Analysis,
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaingn.
23

[]
Y. B. Guo, D. A. Dornfeld. (2000), Finite element modeling of burr formation process in drilling stainless steel.
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 122, 612.
24

[]
S. Min, D.A. Dornfeld, J.Kim, and B.Shyu (2001). Finite element modeling of burr formation in metal cutting,
Machining Science and Technology, Vol. 5 pp. 307-322.
25

[]
T.D. Marusich, T.D., S. Usui, R. Aphale, N. Saini, R. Li and A.J Shih (2006), Three dimensional finite element
modeling of drilling processes, ASME International Conference on Manufacturing Science and Engineering,
Ypsilanti, MI.
26

[]
M. Shatla, T.Altan. (2000). Analytical modeling of drilling and ball end milling. Journal of Materials Processing
Technolog 98, 125.
27

[]
Ozden Isbilir, Elaheh Ghassemieh. (2011). Finite Element Analysis of Drilling of Titanium Alloy. Procedia
Engineering 10 1877–1882
28

[]
J. Gardner, D. Dornfeld. (2006). Finite Element Modeling of Drilling Using DEFORM, NSF Grant DMI-
0300549.
29

[]
Naseer Ahmed. (2014). Effect of Changing Drilling Parameters on Thrust Force and Torque. Middle-East Journal
of Scientific Research 21 (2): 347-352, 2014
[30]
Oxley, P.L.B. (1989) Mechanics of Machining, Ellis Horwood, Chichester, U.K.
[31]
E. Usui, A. Hirota, M. Masuko Analytical predictions of three dimensional cutting process, Part 1, basic cutting
model and energy approach. Journal of Engineering for Industry, 100:222-228.
[32]
J. Strenkowski, J.Carroll, (1985), A Finite Element Model of Machining, Journal of Engineering of Industry,
Vol 107, pp. 349-354.
[33]
Machining Data Handbook, vol. 1, Metcut Research Associates, Cincinnati, 1980.
[34]
DEFORMTM 3D Version 6.0 User’s Manual.
[35]
Yusuf Altintas. (2000), Manufacturing automation: metal cutting mechanics, machine tool vibrations, CNC
design. (Cambridge University Press)
[36]
Y. Yang, J. Sun, (2009). Finite element modelling and simulation of drilling of titanium alloy. Inf. and Comp.
Sci, ICIC ’09. Second Int Conf. 4, 178.
[37]
Cantero, J., Tardío, M., Canteli, J., Marcos, M., and Miguélez, M. (2005). Dry drilling of alloy Ti-6Al-4V. Int. J.
Mach. Tools Manuf., 45 (11): p. 1246–1255
[38]
Jochem Christiaan Roukema. (2006). Mechanics and Dynamics of Drilling. University of British Columbia.
ISBN: 978-0-494-26788-2
[39]
M.C. Shaw, C.J. Oxford. (1957). The drilling of metals Il, The torque and thrust of drilling, Transactions of
ASME 79 139–148
[40]
R.A. Williams. (1974) A study of the drilling process, Journal of Engineering for Industry 96 1207–1215
[41]
M. Pirtini, I.Lazoglu. (2005). Force and hole quality in drilling, International Journal of Machine Tools &
Manufacture 45 (2005) 1271-1281
[42]
Janko D. Jovanovic, Obrad Spaic (2012). Geometric Modeling of Twist Drill.
[43]
W. D. Tsai, S.M Wu (1979). A mathematical Model for Drill Point Design and Grinding. Journal of
Engineering for Industry.
[44]
A.S. Salama and A.H. ELSawy. (1966). The Dynamic Geometry of a Twist Drill Point, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology 56 (1996) 45-53
[45]
J.Sklenicka, I. Cesakava. (2011). Influence of the Twist Drills Geometrical Parameters on Magnitude of Cutting
Forces, University of West Bohemia
[46]
Pavel Kozmin, Josef Sklednicka, Pavel Roud. (2012). FEM method in chip shapes and cutting force prediction
when drilling difficult to cut materials, 24-26.11.2010
[47]
W. Mieszak, K. Lis, (2010), FEM Temprature Modelling in Drilling Process, Trend in the Development of
Machinery and Associated Technology
[48]
T.T. Opoz and X. Chen, (2010), Finite Element Simulation of Chip Formation, Huddersfield HD1 3HD, UK
[49]
Narasimhulu Andriya, P. Venkateswara Rao, Sudarsan Ghosh, (2012), Dry Machining of Ti-6Al-4V using PVD
Coated TiAlN Tools, Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2012 Vol III
[50]
Jihong Yang, Shoujin Sun, Milan Brandt, Wenyi Yan, (2010). Experimental Investigation and 3D Finite
Element Prediction of the Heat Affected zone during laser assisted machining of Ti6Al4V Alloy, Journal of
Material Processing Technology 210 (2010) 2215-2222
[51]
Sergey Zherebtsov, Gennady Salishchev, Rafail Galeyev, Katsuhiro Maekawa, (2005). Mechanical Properties of
Ti6Al4V Titanium Alloy with Submicrocrystalline Structure Produced by Severe Plastic Deformation, Material
Transactions, Vol 46 No.9 (2005)
[52]
S. Nemat-Nasser, W.G. Guo, J.Y. Cheng, (1999). Mechanical Properties and Deformation Mechanisms of a
Commercially Pure Titanium, PII: S1359-6454(99)00203-7
[53]
R.R. Boyer, (1996). An overview on the Use of Titanium in the Aerospace Industry. Material Science &
Engineering, Vol. 213, pp.103-114, ISSN 0921-5093
[54]
E.O. Ezugwu, Z.M. Wang, (1997). Titanium Alloys and Their Machinability – A Review. J. Mater. Process.
Technol., Vol, 68, pp. 262-274, ISSN 0924-0136
[55]
M. Kanai, S. Fujii, Y. Kanda, (1978). Statistical Characteristics of Drill Wear and Drill Life for the
Standardize Performance Tests. Annals of CIRP, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 61-66, ISSN 0007-8506
[56]
D. Field, J.M. Kahles, (1964). The surface integrity of machined and high strength steels. DMIC Report, Vol.
210, pp. 54-77
[57]
E.A. Rahim, S. Sharif, (2008). Investigation on Tool Life and Surface Integrity when Drilling Ti -6Al -4V
and Ti -5Al -4V –Mo/Fe. International Journal of Japan Society of Mechanical Engineer, Series c, Vol. 49, No. 2,
pp. 340-345, ISSN 1347-538X