Metal Machining Episode 8 pptx

with time, so the coefficients of the [B] matrix, which depend on element shape (for exam- ple equation (7.3), for a triangular element), need only be computed once. However, in a problem such as machining, in which determining the location of the free surface of the chip is part of the problem to be solved, it is not clear where the elements should be drawn. It is necessary to develop the free surface boundaries of the element mesh by iteration. A more general problem is how to describe the convection of material property changes, like strain hardening, from element to element. (Eulerian analyses are more common in fluid mechanics than in solid mechanics because fluid properties vary less with deformation than do those of solids.) In steady flow problems, it is assumed that material properties convect along the streamlines. The Lagrangian view has no problem with convection of material properties. The state of a material is fixed in an element. However, the element changes shape during a flow: the [B] matrix requires continued updating. This leads to geometrical non-linearities in addition to material non-linearities in the finite element equations. In extreme cases it may become necessary to simplify a distorted element shape by remeshing (see the next section). There is a further complication. An element most likely rotates as well as distorts as it passes through a flow (as shown in Figure 7.2). After a while, its local x and y directions will differ from those of other elements. However, a common set of axes is required for the transfor- mation of individual element equations to a global assembly. Counter-rotating the local element coordinate system, as well as updating the [B] matrix, is repeatedly required. Structured or adaptive meshing – and other matters It is common sense that a finer mesh is needed where problem variables (velocity, temper- ature) vary strongly with position than where they do not. In metal machining, fine detail is needed to model the primary and secondary shear zones. This poses no problem for Eulerian meshes: a choice is made where to refine the mesh and by how much. However, for computing efficiency with a Lagrangian mesh, there is a need to refine and then coarsen how the material is divided into elements as it flows into and out of plastic shear zones. The need to refine Lagrangian meshes is particularly accute near the cutting edge of a tool, where the work material flow splits into flow under the cutting edge and flow into the chip. A range of approaches to separation at the cutting edge has been developed, from introducing an artificial crack in the work, to highly adaptive remeshing, to developing special elements with singularities in them. These are not needed in Eulerian analyses. Finite element background 203 Fig. 7.2 Eulerian and Lagrangian views of a plastic flow Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 203 In addition to the choice of finite element method based on computational criteria, particular softwares for metal machining should be able to model the variation of flow stress with strain, strain rate and temperature (Section 6.3) and the variation of rake face friction conditions from high load to low load conditions (Chapter 2, Section 2.4) Summary The choice of finite element methods for machining problems involves rigid-plastic or elastic–plastic material models; Eulerian or updated Lagrangian flow treatments; struc- tured or adaptive meshes; chip/work separation criteria needed or not needed; and coupling to thermal calculation models or not. Some of the achievements of these approaches, and methods of overcoming computational problems, are chronicled in the next section. On balance, the updated Lagrangian analyses’ advantage of easily tracking material property changes outweighs the disadvantages of computational complexity. The simplicity of Eulerian computations is not fully realized in the large free surface movement conditions of a chip forming process. 7.2 Historical developments The 1970s The earliest finite element chip formation studies (Zienkiewicz, 1971; Kakino, 1971) avoided all the problems of modelling large flows by simulating the loading of a tool against a pre-formed chip (Figure 7.3). A small strain elastic–plastic analysis demonstrated the development of plastic yielding along the primary shear plane as a tool was displaced against the chip. This work has a number of limitations, making it of historical interest only. For 204 Finite element methods Fig. 7.3 Shear zone development, loading a pre-formed chip (Zienkiewicz, 1971) Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 204 example, it neglects friction between the chip and tool, and strain rate and temperature mater- ial flow stress variations are not considered either. More fundamentally, it assumes the shape of the chip in the first place: the main purpose of chip forming analyses is to predict the shape. The limitations of this initial work were removed by Shirakashi and Usui (1976). While keeping the computational advantages of supposing the tool to move into a pre-formed chip, they developed an iterative way of changing the shape of the pre-form until the gener- ated plastic flow was consistent with the assumed shape. They also included realistic chip/tool friction conditions (from split-tool experiments), a temperature as well as a mechanical calculation, and material flow stress variations with strain, strain rate and temperature, measured from high strain rate Hopkinson bar tests (see Section 7.4). Their iterative convergence method (ICM) is shown in Figure 7.4. The first step of the ICM is to assume a steady state chip shape (similar to Figure 7.3, except for supposing there to be a small crack at the cutting edge to enable the chip to Historical developments 205 Fig. 7.4 The iterative convergence method (ICM) – Shirakashi and Usui (1976) Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 205 separate from the work) and (for plane strain modelling) to create a three-node triangular mesh following the streamlines of the flow. In the first iteration, the tool is moved against the chip: the development of nodal velocities is followed with an updated Lagrangian elastic–plastic analysis. When it is judged that the plastic flow is fully developed, the nodal velocity field is used to calculate the element strain rates along the streamlines; strains are obtained by inte- grating the strain rates with respect to time along the streamlines (as if material had reached its current position by flowing along a streamline). Temperatures are calculated from the inter- nal and friction work rates and the work and tool materials’ thermal properties (in the first application of the ICM, temperature was calculated by a finite difference method, but later the finite element method was used). Material flow stress is then set according to its strain, strain rate and temperature, the tool and chip are unloaded and the cycle of moving the tool into the chip repeated. This is continued until converged strain rates and temperatures are achieved. At that stage, the flow field is used to modify the initially assumed streamlines to be closer to the calculated flow. The complete cycle is then repeated, and repeated again until the assumed and calculated flow fields agree. The displacement of the tool needed to establish the flow field is sufficiently small that the need to reform the crack at the cutting edge does not arise. Within limits, the crack size does not influence the predicted chip flow. Figure 7.5 shows chip shape, equivalent plastic strain rate and temperature fields 206 Finite element methods Fig. 7.5 (a) Strain rates and (b) temperatures predicted by the ICM method for dry machining α -brass, cutting speed 48 m/min, rake angle 30˚, feed 0.3 mm Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 206 calculated by Shirakashi and Usui for machining an a-brass. Chip shape agrees with experiment, as does the temperature field (which was studied experimentally with infrared microscopy). The procedure of loading a tool against an already formed chip greatly reduces comput- ing capacity requirements and, in the 1970s, made elastic–plastic analysis possible. However, it does not follow the actual path by which a chip is formed and, as outlined in Section 7.1 and Appendix 1, the development of elastic–plastic flows is path dependent. The justification of the method is that it gives good agreement with experiment. The ICM has been developed further, in analyses of cutting fluid action (Usui et al., 1977), built-up-edge formation (Usui et al., 1981) and more recently in studies of low alloy semi free-machining steels (Childs and Maekawa, 1990). It is given further consideration in Section 7.3 and Chapter 8. The 1980s Rigid–plastic modelling does not require the actual loading path to be followed (also discussed in Section 7.1 and Appendix 1). Steady state rigid–plastic modelling, within a Eulerian framework, also adjusting an initially assumed flow field to bring it into agreement with the computed field, was first applied to machining by Iwata et al. (1984), using soft- ware developed from metal forming analyses. They included friction and work hardening and also a consideration of whether the chip would fracture, but not heating (and obviously not elastic effects). Experiments at low cutting speed (0.15 mm/min in a scanning electron microscope) supported their predictions. It was not necessary with the Eulerian frame to introduce a crack at the cutting edge, but it was necessary, to avoid computational difficul- ties, to give the cutting edge a small radius (about one tenth of the feed). The mid-1980s, with a growth in available computer power, saw the first non-steady chip formation analyses, following the development of a chip from first contact of a cutting edge with a workpiece, as in practical conditions (Figure 7.6(a)). Updated Lagrangian elas- tic–plastic analysis was used, and the chip/work separation criterion at the cutting edge Historical developments 207 Fig. 7.6 Non-steady state analysis: (a) initial model and (b) separation of nodes at the cutting edge Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 207 became an issue (Figure 7.6(b)): should the connection between elements be broken by a limiting strain, limiting energy or limiting displacement condition? Figure 7.7 shows the earliest example (Strenkowski and Carrol, 1985), which used a strain-based separation criterion. At that time, neither a realistic friction model nor coupling of the elastic–plastic to thermal analysis (and hence nor a realistic flow stress variation with cutting conditions) was included. At the same time as plastic flow finite element methods were being developed for metal machining, linear fracture mechanics methods were being developed for the machining of brittle ceramics (Ueda and Sugita, 1983). The 1990s The 1990s have seen the development of non-steady analysis, from transient to discontin- uous chip formation, the first three-dimensional analyses and the introduction of adaptive meshing techniques particularly to cope with flow around the cutting edge of a tool. Figure 7.8 shows an updated Lagrangian elastic–plastic simulation of discontinuous chip formation in b-brass at low cutting speed. To obtain this result a geometrical 208 Finite element methods Fig. 7.7 An example of non-steady state analysis (Strenkowski and Carrol, 1985) Fig. 7.8 Discontinuous chip formation in β -brass (Obikawa et al. 1997): (1–6) element deformation and (7) equiva- lent plastic strain distribution, at different cut distances l (7) Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 208 (displacement controlled) parting criterion at the cutting edge was combined with an empirical crack nucleation and growth criterion, considered further in Section 7.3 and Chapter 8. Other authors have taken different approaches to crack growth during chip formation (Ueda et al. 1991). Figures 7.9 and 7.10 are the earliest examples of elastic–plastic steady and non-steady three-dimensional analyses. The steady state example is an extension of the ICM to three Historical developments 209 Fig. 7.9 Three-dimensional steady state chip formation by the ICM (Maekawa and Maeda, 1993): (a) initial model and (b) equivalent strain rate distribution Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 209 dimensions. The non-steady example employs a geometrical parting criterion at both the primary and secondary cutting edges. In both these cases, temperature and strain rate effects are ignored, to reduce the computing requirements. This restriction was soon removed: three-dimensional elastic–plastic, thermally coupled, ICM simulation soon became used for cutting tool design, also considered further in Chapter 8 (Maekawa et al. 1994). In parallel with the extension of elastic–plastic methods to non-steady and three-dimen- sional conditions, the rigid–plastic method (Iwata et al., 1984) was similarly being devel- oped (Ueda and Manabe, 1993; Ueda et al., 1996), with a shift from Eulerian to Lagrangian modelling. Figure 7.11 shows the simulation of spirally curled chip formation during milling with a non-zero axial rake tool. A simple form of remeshing at the cutting edge, instead of a geometrical crack, was introduced to accommodate the separation of the chip from the work. Adaptive mesh refinement in non-steady flows, whereby during an increment of flow (a time step) the mesh is fixed to the work material in a Lagrangian manner – but between steps the mesh connectivity and size is changed according to rules based on local severities of deformation – offers the advantage over fixed Lagrangian approaches of concentrating the mesh where it is needed most, in the primary shear zone, at the cutting edge and along the rake face. Concentration at the cutting edge provides an alternative to introducing a crack for following the separation of the chip from the work. Both rigid–plastic (Sekhon and Chenot, 210 Finite element methods Fig. 7.10 Three-dimensional non-steady chip formation (Sasahara et al., 1994): (a) element deformations and (b) equivalent plastic strain distribution Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 210 1993; Ceretti et al., 1996) and elastic–plastic (Marusich and Ortiz, 1995) adaptive remesh- ing softwares have been developed and are being applied to chip formation simulation. They seem more effective than arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE) methods in which the mesh is neither fixed in space nor in the workpiece (for example Rakotomolala et al., 1993). Summary The 1970s to the 1990s has seen the development and testing of finite element techniques for chip formation processes. Many of the researches have been more concerned with the development of methods than their immediate application value: the limited availability of Historical developments 211 Fig. 7.11 Three-dimensional non-steady chip formation by rigid plastic finite element method (Ueda et al ., 1996): (a) initial model and (b) spiral chips Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 211 reliable friction and high strain, strain rate and temperature material flow properties did not hold back this work. The ICM approach is the exception: from the start it has been concerned with supporting machining applications. Now that all methods are approaching maturity, attention is shifting to the provision of appropriate friction and material flow property data (see Section 7.4). In the future there are likely to be three main avenues of finite element modelling of chip formation: (1) the ICM method for steady state processes, because of its extremely high computing efficiency; (2) Lagrangian adaptive mesh refinement methods for unsteady processes, both elastic–plastic as the most complete treatment and rigid–plastic for its fewer computing requirements if elastic effects are not needed; and (3) fixed mesh Lagrangian methods (with chip separation criteria) to support educational studies of unsteady processes in a time effective manner. Chapter 8 will concentrate on the first and the last of these, but a future edition may well include more of the second. 7.3 The Iterative Convergence Method (ICM) Sections 7.3.1 and 7.3.2 give more details of the ICM method (which was introduced in the previous section), as background to the examples of its use presented in Chapter 8. Section 7.3.3 introduces a treatment of unsteady processes (case (3) above). 7.3.1 Principles and implementation As has already been described, the ICM method is an updated Lagrangian elastic–plastic finite element analysis for predicting steady state chip flows. Such analyses normally must follow the development of strain along a material’s load path and are computationally very intensive. The ICM method replaces the real path by a shorter one: loading the tool onto an already formed chip. It provides a way, by iteration, of finding the formed chip shape that is consistent with the material’s flow properties and friction interaction with the tool. A key point is that its finite elements are structured to follow the stream lines of the steady state chip flow (as will be seen in Figure 7.13). The flow chart of the ICM procedure as it was originally introduced, is shown in Figure 7.4. Figure 7.12 shows its developed form. An initial guess of the chip flow or stream lines (usually of the simple straight shear plane type considered in Chapter 2) is made and the tool is placed so that its rake face just touches the back surface of the chip. Calculation proceeds by incrementally displacing the workpiece towards the tool so that a load devel- ops between the chip and tool. At each increment, it is checked if the plastic flow is fully developed (saturated): if it is not, a further increment is applied (loop I). Once the flow is developed, the initial guess is systematically and automatically reformed to bring it into closer agreement with the calculated flow. The strain rate in each element of the reformed flow is calculated; and the strain distribution is obtained by integrating strain rate along the streamlines. The element flow stress associated with the reformed flow is then estimated; but this requires temperature as well as strain and strain rate to be known. A second loop (loop II), a thermal finite element analysis, is entered to determine the temperature field. Finally, it is checked whether the derived material flow stress, temperature and flow fields have converged: if they have not, the whole iteration is repeated (loop III). The next para- graphs give some details that are special to the calculations. 212 Finite element methods Childs Part 2 28:3:2000 3:14 pm Page 212 [...]... Engineering Science 2nd edn Ch 18 London: McGraw-Hill Zerilli, F J and Armstrong, R W (1 987 ) Dislocation-mechanics based constitutive relations for material dynamics calculations J Appl Phys 61, 181 6– 182 5 Zerilli, F J and Armstrong, R W (1997) Dislocation mechanics based analysis of materials dynamics behaviour J de Physique IV 7(C8), 637–6 48 Childs Part 2 28: 3:2000 3:15 pm Page 226 8 Applications of finite... Tech 106, 132–1 38 Kakino, Y (1971) Analysis of the mechanism of orthogonal machining by the finite element method J Japan Soc Prec Eng 37(7), 503–5 08 Maekawa, K and Maeda, M (1993) Simulation analysis of three-dimensional continuous chip formation processes (1st report) – FEM formulation and a few results J Japan Soc Prec Eng 59(11), 182 7– 183 3 Maekawa, K., Kubo, A and Kitagawa, T (1 988 ) Simulation analysis... the local shear flow stress at the rake face; and with m = 1 and m = 1.6 8. 1.2 Orthogonal machining without BUE Figure 8. 1 shows the predicted chip shape and other quantities at the high cutting speed of 75 m/min Figure 8. 1(a) shows the pattern of distorted grid lines calculated from the nodal Fig 8. 1 Simulated machining of a 0. 18% C steel at a cutting speed of 75 m/min where no BUE appears: (a) distorted... mechanism in plasma hot machining of high manganese steels, Bull Japan Soc Prec Eng 22(3), 183 – 189 Maekawa, K., Ohhata, H and Kitagawa, T (1994) Simulation analysis of cutting performance of a three-dimensional cut-away tool In Usui, E (ed.), Advancement of Intelligent Production Tokyo: Elsevier, pp 3 78 383 Marusich, T D and Ortiz, M (1995) Modelling and simulation of high speed machining Int J Num Methods... in Chapter 3 (Section 3.2 .8) but this too has not been considered since Section 8. 4 introduces finite element analyses of chip control and the effects of cutting edge shape that have a potential to support rational tool design 8. 1 Simulation of BUE formation Built-up edges occur at some cutting speed or other in machining most metal alloys containing more than one phase, as machining conditions change... orthogonal metal cutting Trans ASME J Eng Ind 107, 349–354 Trent, E M (1991) Metal Cutting, 3rd edn Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann Ueda, K and Sugita, T (1 983 ) Application of fracture mechanics in micro-cutting of engineering ceramics Annals CIRP 32(1), 83 86 Ueda, K and Manabe, K (1993) Rigid-plastic FEM analysis of three-dimensional deformation field in chip formation process Annals CIRP 42(1), 35– 38 Ueda,... work hardening, as shown in Figure 8. 3(c) These changes are all favourable to the separation of the flow by shear fracture, to Fig 8. 3 Converged results at the cutting speed of 30 m/min: (a) and (c) as in Figures 8. 1 and 8. 2 but (b) distribution of γm and hydrostatic pressure p Childs Part 2 28: 3:2000 3:16 pm Page 232 232 Applications of finite element analysis Fig 8. 3 continued generate the nucleus... (b) distributions of maximum shear strain γm and strain rate γ˘ m and (c) distributions of shear flow stress k and temperature T (°C) Childs Part 2 28: 3:2000 3:16 pm Page 2 28 2 28 Applications of finite element analysis Fig 8. 1 continued Childs Part 2 28: 3:2000 3:16 pm Page 229 Simulation of BUE formation 229 velocities along the flow lines (following the method of Johnson and Kudo, 1962) The grey area... 62(4), 526–531 Usui, E and Shirakashi, T (1 982 ) Mechanics of machining – from descriptive to predictive theory ASME Publication PED 7, 13–35 Usui, E., Shirakashi, T and Obikawa, T (1977) Simulation analysis of cutting fluid action J Japan Soc Prec Eng 43(9), 1063–10 68 Usui, E., Maekawa, K and Shirakashi, T (1 981 ) Simulation analysis of built-up edge formation in machining of low carbon steel Bull Japan... in Num Methods in Engng 9, 975– 987 Sasahara, H., Obikawa, T and Shirakashi, T (1994) FEM analysis on three dimensional cutting – analysis on large deformation problem of tool entry Int J Japan Soc Prec Eng 28( 2), 123–1 28 Sekhon, G S and Chenot, S (1993) Numerical simulation of continuous chip formation during nonsteady orthogonal cutting Engineering Computations 10, 31– 48 Shirakashi, T and Usui, E (1976) . ICM method for dry machining α -brass, cutting speed 48 m/min, rake angle 30˚, feed 0.3 mm Childs Part 2 28: 3:2000 3:14 pm Page 206 calculated by Shirakashi and Usui for machining an a-brass (Usui et al., 1 981 ) and more recently in studies of low alloy semi free -machining steels (Childs and Maekawa, 1990). It is given further consideration in Section 7.3 and Chapter 8. The 1 980 s Rigid–plastic. methods were being developed for metal machining, linear fracture mechanics methods were being developed for the machining of brittle ceramics (Ueda and Sugita, 1 983 ). The 1990s The 1990s have seen