Astakhov V. Tribology of Metal Cutting

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Tribology of the Tool–Chip and Tool–Workpiece Interfaces 207

deformation zone to keep this cold junction at room temperature. Arranged in this way,

thermocouples produce the e.m.f. while the layer being removed passes the deformation

zone, becoming the chip that moves over the tool rake face.

Using the results of such measurements, the temperature ﬁeld can then be reconstructed,

as shown in an example in Fig. 3.54(b) for AISI 1045 steel work material machined on

a shaper with the uncut chip thickness t

= 2 mm using the P10 carbide tool having a

rake angle of γ = 10

◦

Figure 3.54(c) shows the use of the running thermocouple technique for measuring tem-

perature distribution at the tool–chip and tool–workpiece interfaces. A tube-workpiece

is used for experiments. A hole of 0.8–1.2 mm diameter is drilled in the workpiece, and

a thin-wall protective tube is inserted into this hole. Then, two insulated wires made of

thermocouple materials (for instance, one from chromel and the other from copel) are

inserted into the tube, and their ends A

and C

are connected to two ampliﬁers on

a data acquisition board. In cutting, the protective tube (made of material similar to that

of the workpiece) is cut into two portions, as shown in Fig. 3.54(c). As such, two running

thermocouples are formed having outputs A

and C

. The ﬁrst thermocouple runs

over the tool–chip interface, registering a temperature distribution along the tool–chip

contact length while the second thermocouple runs over the tool–workpiece interface,

registering a temperature distribution along the tool–workpiece contact length.

Figure 3.54(d) shows an example of the obtained result for two work materials: steel

AISI 1045 and Ti Grade 1 alloy. Other cutting parameters were as follows: cutting speed

ν = 120 m/min, feed f = 0.26 mm/rev, depth of cut d

= 3 mm, tool material – M30

carbide, rake angle γ

= 0

◦

, ﬂank angle α

= 12

◦

Although the technique of temperature measurements in metal cutting with running ther-

mocouples is the only feasible method of obtaining temperature distributions at the

interfaces and to determine the location of the points of maximum temperature at these

interfaces with respect to the cutting edge, it has some limitations:

• The use of this method requires extensive training of the experimentalist and proper

design of a setup. The proper reading can be obtained only by an experienced spe-

cialist. To the best of the author’s knowledge, no one company, college or university

provides such a training today.

• Each test requires a great deal of preparation time.

Tool–work thermocouple. This is the most widely used method for measuring tempera-

ture in metal cutting studies [34,36]. With this method, the average integral temperature

at the tool–chip and tool–workpiece interfaces, deﬁned earlier as the cutting temperature,

is measured. Because the exact nature of formation of the signal measured by this ther-

mocouple is not known, the result of measurements cannot be compared with the results

of analytical studies or measurements obtained using other experimental techniques.

Unfortunately, this issue is not well understood, so there are a number of attempts made

to compare the results obtained using a tool–work thermocouple to those obtained in

analytical and numerical studies [88,132].

208 Tribology of Metal Cutting

Cutting tool

Mercury contact

Spindle

Insulation

Amplifier

PC computer with DAB

Workpiece

2334 23334

α = 567890

ωε

34456ψ

Fig. 3.55. Tool–work thermocouple circuit.

Figure 3.55 shows the principle of this method. Because the tool and work materials are

normally different, their contact at the tool–chip and tool–workpiece interfaces forms

the hot junction of the tool–work thermocouple. The components of this thermocouple

are insulated from the machine and ﬁxtures to eliminate noise in the output signal. This

output signal is the e.m.f. voltage which is ampliﬁed and then is fed to the data acquisition

board plugged into a computer for further analysis.

The major problem with tool–work thermocouples is their proper calibration [36]. The

objective of the calibration is to obtain a calibration curve (normally a straight line

[34,88,133]) that correlates the e.m.f. produced by the thermocouple and temperature.

Although the literature offers a wide range of calibration procedures for this thermo-

couple, two basically different methods are common nowadays. The ﬁrst one [34,57,68]

involves comparing the e.m.f. produced by the tool–work thermocouple and a standard

thermocouple placed in a thermoinsulated container with a molten metal (normally, tin

or lead) having uniform temperature. As such, the tool–work thermocouple is made of

a rod of the tool material and a long chip of the work material is held in tight contact

at their ends. If the properties of work material do not allow forming a long chip, then

a rod made of the work material is used. The second method is to calibrate a tool–work

thermocouple when the tool is brought in tight contact with the workpiece and the heat

Tribology of the Tool–Chip and Tool–Workpiece Interfaces 209

is applied by an oxygen–acetylene or propane torch [88]. As such, a standard reference

thermocouple is spot welded into the cutting insert at the would be tool–chip interface.

Since the calibration is critical to obtaining accurate results, a few severe problems

associated with the known calibrations have to be pointed out:

• Circuits used in calibration and in actual cutting are not the same. Commonly, the

samples that represent the tool and chip are not even in contact (Fig. 12.2 in Ref. [34],

Fig. 7.3(a) in Ref. [57]). Even if they are brought in close contact, the actual contact

area is not the same as in reality and the contact pressure is well below than that in

actual cutting. Besides, the contact between the tool ﬂank and the workpiece taking

place in actual cutting is completely ignored and a mercury contact connecting the

rotating spindle with the ampliﬁer is not present in the calibration circuit.

• Lead or tin bath is used in calibrations to obtain the uniform maximum calibration

temperature. However, the temperature of molten lead is far below those expected

in cutting. Since the calibration curve for a natural thermocouple may not be linear

(Fig. 12.3 in Ref. [34]), it is next to impossible to extrapolate the obtained results,

i.e. the obtained calibration curves may contain signiﬁcant errors. The same problem

exists with torch heating.

• Since the specimen representing the tool in calibrations has rather restricted length,

it is very difﬁcult to keep the cold junction of a natural thermocouple at constant

temperature. As pointed out in Ref. [57], it is particularly true when small indexable

tool inserts are used. The same problem occurs with obtaining a sufﬁciently long

chip for the workpiece materials of relatively low ductility.

One of the possible methods for calibrating the natural thermocouples is based on the

above-discussed ﬁrst principle of thermoelectric circuit can be used [36,90]. According

to this principle, a third metal, connected in the circuit, does not change the net e.m.f. of

the circuit if the new connection is at the same temperature as the initial junction [36].

An arrangement for calibration is shown in Fig 3.56(a). The workpiece 1 is cut by two

geometrically similar cutters 2 and 3 made of different tool materials having similar

thermal conductivity. Because both tools work in the same cutting regime, it may be

assumed that both tools have the same contact temperature so that the requirement of

the second law is justiﬁed when the workpiece is considered as the third metal in the

circuit. The arrangement also includes a two-position switch 4 and an analog–digital

millivoltmeter 5 with built-in ampliﬁer. The output of the millivoltmeter 5 is connected

to a computer 6.

The calibration procedure includes two successive stages. In the ﬁrst stage, a relatively

low-melting-point material (for instance, aluminum) is used as the work material and its

melting point is stored in the computer program used in the calibration. The switch 4 is

in the a-position. When cutting starts, the cutting speed is gradually increased up to the

point when the work material begins to melt at the tool–chip interface of both cutters.

The e.m.f. E

corresponding to this point is registered by the millivoltmeter 5 and then

is stored in the computer program. Several tests with different work materials can be

carried out to obtain calibration curve E

= f(θ), as shown in Fig. 3.56(b).

210 Tribology of Metal Cutting

E = f(q )

E = j(q )

(a) (b)

Fig. 3.56. Arrangement for calibration of tool–work thermocouple.

At the second stage of calibration, the actual work material is used. In a given cutting

regime, the e.m.f. of the two-cutter thermocouple is measured to be E

using which

the computer calculated the corresponding temperature θ

. After this measurement is

taken, the computer gives a signal to a servomechanism for fast withdrawal of the

second cutter 3 in the direction shown by an arrow in Fig. 3.56(a) and simultaneously

the switch 4 is moved to the b-position. The cutter 1 is still working at the same cutting

regime. A new e.m.f. E

is measured. Although the cutting temperature θ

does not

change, E

= E

as the latter was measured using a new tool–work thermocouple.

Using a few measuring points (cutting regimes) and corresponding differences in the

e.m.f.s, the computer calculates the corrected calibration curve E

= ϕ(θ) which is

used in further experiments.

3.4.3 Generalizations

Because the temperature generated in machining is one of the major factors that deter-

mine tool life and that limit the cutting rate, its proper assessment, correlation with the

characteristics and parameters of the cutting system and control are of enormous signiﬁ-

cance in metal cutting theory and practice as well as in the tool and machine design and

selection.

The results of the theoretical and experimental studies on temperatures in metal cutting

can be summarized as follows:

• There are two most relevant temperatures found in metal cutting: First is the average

integral contact temperature as measured by the tool–work thermocouple technique.

Tribology of the Tool–Chip and Tool–Workpiece Interfaces 211

As shown in the practice of metal cutting research [68,85,88,89], this is the most

stable and relevant characteristic that can be measured with high accuracy, great

repeatability and reproducibility. Second is the maximum contact temperature and

the point of its location with respect to the cutting edge. This temperature may

cause the plastic lowering of the cutting edge and catastrophic tool failure limiting

the allowable cutting speed.

• Analytical and numerical methods used for the assessment of temperatures in metal

cutting suffer severe drawbacks, so their results can hardly be used in any practical

application. The only proper way to change this state of the art is to use the proper

metal cutting model with realistic contact conditions at the tool–chip and tool–

workpiece interfaces. As for numerical methods, the proper procedure should be

fully developed to account for large plastic deformation and fracture taking place

in metal cutting.

• The similarity method is much less sensitive to the particular model used in modeling

particularly when applied to the thermal analysis of metal cutting [36,68]. This

method is much more realistic than the analytical and numerical methods developed

so far. Relatively simple, straightforward and physically justiﬁable calculations of

temperature in metal cutting used in this method should prevent further attention of

researchers and practitioners. In the author’s opinion, this method should be put as

the basis of software packages for the simulation of metal cutting.

• Among the known methods used today for experimental determination of tempera-

tures in metal cutting, the tool–work thermocouple technique is the most accurate

[89,134] although the infrared thermography technique also has some potential.

In the author’s opinion, the tool–work thermocouple technique should be used on

all modern metal cutting machines as part of their control system. Although one

may argue that additional cost might be needed for electrical insulation of ﬁxturing

and tooling, the resulting gain will deﬁnitely overlap these costs. First and foremost,

the optimal control of the cutting process can be achieved if such a technique is

available on the machine tool (see Chapter 4). Second, it is conclusively proven

that electrical insulation of ﬁxturing and tooling causes the tool life to increase by

10–20% because it prevents electro-diffusion tool wear predominant at high cutting

speeds [135,136].

References

[1] Merchant, M.E., Mechanics of the metal cutting process. I. Orthogonal cutting and a type 2

chip, Journal of Applied Physics, 16 (1945), 267–275.

[2] Zorev, N.N., Metal Cutting Mechanics, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1966.

[3] Dieter, G., Mechanical Metallurgy, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1976.

[4] Kronenberg, M., Machining Science and Application. Theory and Practice for Operation

and Development of Machining Processes, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1966.

[5] Armarego, E.J., Brown, R.H., The Machining of Metals, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, US,

1969.

212 Tribology of Metal Cutting

[6] Finnie, I., Shaw, M.C., The friction process in metal cutting, Transactions of ASME, 77

(1956), 1649–1657.

[7] Usui, E., Takeyma, H., A photoelastic analysis of machining stresses, ASME Journal of

Engineering for Industry, 81 (1960), 303–308.

[8] Strenkowski, J.S., Moon, K.-J., Finite element prediction of chip geometry and

tool/workpiece temperature distributions in orthogonal metal cutting, ASME Journal of

Engineering for Industry, 112 (1990), 313–318.

[9] Komvopoulos, K., Erpenbeck, S.A., Finite element modeling of orthogonal metal cutting,

ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry, 113 (1991), 253–267.

[10] Lin, Z.C., Pan, W.C., Lo, S.P., A study of orthogonal cutting with tool ﬂank wear and

sticking behaviour on the chip–tool interface, Journal of Materials Processing Technology,

52 (1995), 524–538.

[11] Lin, Z.C., Lin, S.Y., A coupled ﬁnite element model of thermo-elastic-plastic large deforma-

tion for orthogonal cutting, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, 114 (1992),

218–226.

[12] Strenkowski, J.S., Carroll, J.T., A ﬁnite element model of orthogonal metal cutting, ASME

Journal of Engineering for Industry, 107 (1985), 349–354.

[13] Endres, W.J., Devor, R.E., Kapoor, S.G., A dual-mechanism approach to the prediction

of machining forces, Part 2: calibration and validation, ASME Journal of Engineering for

Industry, 117 (1995), 534–541.

[14] Olovsson, L., Nilsson, L., Simonsson, K., An ALE formulation for the solution

of two-dimensional metal cutting problems, Computers and Structures, 72 (1998),

497–507.

[15] Hahn, R.S., On the temperature development at the shear plane in the metal cutting

process. In Proceedings of the First US Nat. Appl. Mech., ASME, New York, 1952,

pp. 112–118.

[16] Chao, B.T., Trigger, K.J., Cutting temperatures and metal cutting phenomena, ASME

Journal of Engineering for Industry, 73 (1951), 777–793.

[17] Lowell, M.R., Deng, Z., Experimental investigation of sliding friction between hard

and deformable surfaces with application to manufacturing processes, Wear, 236 (1999),

117–127.

[18] Challen, J.M., Oxley, P.L.B., An explanation of the different regimes of friction and wear

using asperity deformation models, Wear, 53 (1979), 229–243.

[19] Kayaba, T., Kato, K., Hokkirigawa, K., Theoretical analysis of the plastic yielding of a

hard asperity sliding on a soft ﬂat surface, Wear, 87 (1983), 151–161.

[20] Kayaba, T., Hokkirigawa, K., Kato, K., Experimental analysis of the plastic yielding of a

hard asperity sliding on a soft ﬂat surface, Wear, 96 (1984), 255–265.

[21] Challen, J.M., Oxley, P.L.B., A slip-line ﬁeld analysis of the transition from local asperity

contact to full contact in metallic sliding friction, Wear, 100 (1984), 171–193.

[22] Komvopoulos, K., Saka, N., Suh, N.P., Plowing friction in dry and lubricated metal sliding,

ASME Journal of Tribology, 108 (1986), 301–313.

Tribology of the Tool–Chip and Tool–Workpiece Interfaces 213

[23] Komvopoulos, K., Saka, N., Suh, N.P., The role of hard layers in lubricated and dry sliding,

ASME Journal of Tribology, 109 (1987), 223–231.

[24] Black, A.J., Kopalinsky, E.M., Oxley, P.L.B., An investigation of the different regimes of

deformation which can occur when a hard wedge slides over a soft surface: the inﬂuence

of the wedge angle, lubrication and prior plastic working of the surface, Wear, 123 (1988),

97–114.

[25] Black, A.J., Kopalinsky, E.M., Oxley, P.L.B., Sliding metallic friction with boundary

lubrication: an investigation of a simpliﬁed friction theory and of the nature of boundary

lubrication, Wear, 137 (1990), 161–174.

[26] Kopalinsky, E.M., Investigation of surface deformation when a hard wedge slides over a

soft surface, ASME Journal of Tribology, 114 (1992), 100–106.

[27] Black, A.J., Kopalinsky, E.M., Oxley, P.L.B., Asperity deformation models for explaining

the mechanisms involved in metallic sliding friction and wear – a review, Proceedings of the

Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science,

207 (1993), 335–353.

[28] Sutcliffe, M.P.F., Surface asperity deformation in metal forming processes, International

Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 30 (1988), 847–868.

[29] Yang, Y., Torrance, A.A., Oxley, P.L.B., Modelling mechanical wear processes in metallic

sliding friction. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 29 (1996), 600–608.

[30] Torrance, A.A., Buckey, T.R., A slip-line ﬁeld model of abrasive wear, Wear, 196 (1996),

35–45.

[31] Kopalinsky, E.M., Oxley, P.L.B., An investigation of the mechanics of sliding metallic wear

under lubricated conditions, Wear, 214 (1998), 38–46.

[32] Byers, J.P., Laboratory evaluation of metalworking ﬂuids, in Metalworking Fluids,

J.P. Byers, Editor. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1994, pp. 191–221.

[33] Komanduri, R., Larsen-Basse, J., Tribology: the cutting edge, Mechanical Engineering, 111

(1989), 74–79.

[34] Shaw, M.C., Metal Cutting Principles, Oxford Science Publications, Oxford, 1984.

[35] Oxley, P.L.B., Mechanics of Machining: An Analytical Approach to Assessing Machinabil-

ity, John Wiley & Sons, New York, US, 1989.

[36] Astakhov, V.P., Metal Cutting Mechanics, CRC Press, Boca Raton, US, 1998.

[37] Trent, E.M., Wright, P.K., Metal Cutting, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, US, 2000.

[38] Arsecularatne, J.A., On tool–chip interface stress distributions, ploughing force and size

effect in machining, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 37 (1997),

885–899.

[39] Doyle, E.D., Horne, J.G., Tabor, D., Frictional interactions between chip and rake face in

continuous chip formation, Proceedings of Royal Society, London A, 366 (1979), 173–183.

[40] Coker, E.G., Filon, L.N.G., Treatise on Photoelasticity, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, 1931.

[41] Zeichev, A.G., Optical Methods of Stress Analysis, Frontier Publishing, Moscow, 1934.

214 Tribology of Metal Cutting

[42] Frocht, M.M., Thomson, R.A., Studies in Photoelasticity. In Proceedings of the Third U.S

National Congress of Applied Mechanics, 1958, pp. 25–34.

[43] Ocushiri, M., Fukuii, S., Studies of cutting action by means of photoelasticity, Journal of

the Society of Precision Mechanics of Japan, 1 (1934), 508–514.

[44] Andreev, G.S., Photoelastic study of stresses in a cutting tool using cinematography

(in Russian), Vestnyk Machinostroeniya, 38 (1958), 54–57.

[45] Kattwinkel, W., Untersuchungen an schneiden spanender werkzeuge mit hilfe der span-

nungsoptic, Industry-Anzeiger, 37 (1957), 29–33.

[46] Takeyama, H., Usui, H., The effect of tool–chip contact area in metal cutting, ASME Journal

of Engineering for Industry, 79 (1958), 1089–1096.

[47] Chandrasekaran, H., Kapoor, D.V., Photoelastic analysis of tool–chip interface stresses,

ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry, 87 (1965), 495–502.

[48] Amini, E., Photoelastic analysis of stresses and forces in steady cutting, Journal of Strain

Analysis, 3 (1968), 206–213.

[49] Okushima, K., Kakino, Y., Hagihara, S., Hasimito, H., A stress analysis in the orthog-

onal cutting by photo elasto-plasticity method, Bulletin of Japanese Society of Precision

Engineering, 5 (1971), 1–7.

[50] Barrow, G., Graham, W., Kurimoto, T., Leong, Y.F., Determination of rake face stress

distribution in orthogonal machining, International Journal of Machine Tool Design and

Research, 22 (1982), 75–85.

[51] Bagachi, A., Wright, P.K., Stress analysis in machining with the use of sapphire tools,

Proceedings of Royal Society of London A, 409 (1987), 99–113.

[52] Loladze, T.N., Strength and Wear of Cutting Tools (in Russian), Mashgiz, Moscow,

1958.

[53] Gordon, M.B., The applicability of binomial law to the process of friction in the cutting of

metals, Wear, 10 (1967), 274–290.

[54] Kato, S., Yamaguchi, K., Yamada, M., Stress distribution at the interface between the

tool and chip in machining, ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry, 93 (1972),

683–689.

[55] Boothroyd, G., Knight, W.A., Fundamentals of Machining and Machine Tools, Second

Edition. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1989.

[56] Gorczyca, F.Y., Application of Metal Cutting Theory, Industrial Press, New York, 1987.

[57] Stenphenson, D.A., Agapiou, J.S., Metal Cutting Theory and Practice, Marcel Dekker,

New York, 1996.

[58] Childs, T.H.C., Maekawa, K., Obikawa, T., Yamane, Y., Metal Machining. Theory and

Application, Arnold, London, 2000.

[59] Schey, J.A., Metal Deformation Processes: Friction and Lubrication, Marcel Dekker,

New York, 1970.

[60] Schey, J.A., Tribology in Metalworking, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, Ohio,

1983.

Tribology of the Tool–Chip and Tool–Workpiece Interfaces 215

[61] Usui, E., Shirakashi, T., Mechanics of metal cutting – from “description” to “predic-

tive” theory, in On the Art of Cutting Metals – 75 Years Later, Phoenix, Arizona, ASME,

New York, 1982, pp. 13–36.

[62] Buryta, D., Sowerby, R., Yellowley, Y., Stress distributions on the rake face during

orthogonal machining, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, (1994),

721–739.

[63] Machado, A.R., Wallbank, J., The effect of extremely low lubricant volumes in machining,

Wear, 210 (1997), 76–82.

[64] Roth, R.N., Oxley, P.L.B., A slipline ﬁeld analysis for orthogonal machining based

on experimental ﬂow ﬁelds, Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, 14 (1972),

86–97.

[65] DeGarmo, E.P., Black, J.T., Kohser, R.A., Materials and Processes in Manufacturing,

Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1997.

[66] Hsu, T.C., A study of normal and shear stresses on a cutting tool, ASME Journal of

Engineering for Industry, 94 (1966), 51–64.

[67] Lin, Z.-C., Lo, S.-P., A study of deformation of the machined workpiece and tool under dif-

ferent low cutting velocities with an elastic cutting tool, International Journal of Mechanical

Science, 40 (1998), 663–668.

[68] Silin, S.S., Similarity Methods in Metal Cutting (in Russian), Moscow, Machinostroenie,

1979.

[69] Poletica, M.F., Contact Loads on Tool Interfaces (in Russian), Machinostroenie, Moscow,

1969.

[70] Abuladze, N.G., The tool–chip interface: determination of the contact length and properties

(in Russian), in Machinability of Heat Resistant and Titanium Alloys, Kyibashev Regional

Publ. House, Kyibashev, Russia, 1962, pp. 87–96.

[71] Hills, D.A., Nowell, D., Sackﬁeld, A., Mechanics of Elastic Contact, Butterworth-

Heinmann, London, 1993.

[72] Muskhelishvili, N.I., Some Basic Problems of the Mathematical Theory of Elasticity,

Sijthoff & Noordhoff Int. Pub., Leyden, 1977.

[73] Astakhov, V.P., Outeiro, J.C., Modeling of the contact stress distribution at the tool–chip

interface, Machining Science and Technology, 9 (2005), 85–99.

[74] Galin, L.A., Contact Problems in the Theory of Elasticity (in Russian), Gostechnozdat,

Moscow, 1953.

[75] Astakhov, V.P., Shvets, S.V., A system concept in metal cutting, Journal of Materials

Processing Technology, 79 (1998), 189–199.

[76] Poletica, M.F., Contact Loads on Cutting Tool Interface Surfaces (in Russian),

Machinostroenie, Moscow, 1969.

[77] Astakhov, V.P., Shvets, S., The assessment of plastic deformation in metal cutting, Journal

of Materials Processing Technology, 146 (2004), 193–202.

[78] Klushin, M.I., Metal Cutting: Basics of Plastic Deformation of the Layer been Removed,

Mashgiz, Moscow, Russia, 1958.

216 Tribology of Metal Cutting

[79] Liu, G., Wang, Q., Thermoelastic asperity contacts, frictional shear, and parameter

correlations, Journal of Tribology, 122 (2000), 300–307.

[80] Spaans, C., Treatise on the streamlines and the stress, strain, and strain rate distribution,

and on stability in the primary shear zone in metal cutting, ASME Journal of Engineering

for Industry, 94 (1972), 690–696.

[81] Isakov, E., Mechanical Properties of Work Materials, Hanser Gardener Publications,

Cincinnati, OH, 2000.

[82] Shuster, L.S.H., Adhesion Processes at the Tool–Work Material Interface (in Russian)

Machinostroenie, Moscow, 1988.

[83] Chen, N.N.S., Pun, W.K., Stresses at the cutting tool wear land, International Journal of

Machine Tools and Manufacture, 28 (1988), 79–92.

[84] Altintas, Y., Manufacturing Automation. Metal Cutting Mechanics, Machine Tool

Vibrations, and CNC Design, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.

[85] Makarow, A.D., Optimization of Cutting Processes (in Russian), Machinostroenie, Moscow,

1976.

[86] Komarovsky, A.A., Astakhov, V.P., Physics of Strength and Fracture Control: Fundamentals

of the Adaptation of Engineering Materials and Structures, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2002.

[87] Astakhov, V.P., Tribology of metal cutting, in Mechanical Tribology, H. Liang, G.E. Totten,

Editors. Marcel Dekker, New York, 2004, pp. 307–346.

[88] Leshock, C.E., Shin, Y.C., Investigation on cutting temperature in turning by a tool-work

thermocouple technique, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, 119 (1997),

502–508.

[89] Silva, M.B., Wallbank, J., Cutting temperature: prediction and measurement methods –

a review, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 88 (1999), 195–202.

[90] Reznikov, A.N., Reznikov, L.A., Thermal Processes in Machining Systems (in Russian),

Machiostroenie, Moscow, 1990.

[91] Komanduri, R., Hou, Z.B., Thermal modeling of the metal cutting process. Part I –

Temperature rise distributing due to shear plane heat source, International Journal of

Mechanical Science, 42 (2000), 1715–1752.

[92] Komanduri, R., Hou, Z.B., Thermal modeling of the metal cutting process – Part II: temper-

ature rise distribution due to frictional heat source at the tool–chip interface, International

Journal of Mechanical Science, 43 (2001), 57–88.

[93] Komanduri, R., Hou, Z.B., Thermal modeling of the metal cutting process – Part III:

temperature rise distribution due to the combined effect of the shear plane heat source and

the tool–chip interface frictional source, International Journal of Mechanical Science, 43

(2001), 89–107.

[94] Ramesh, M.V., Seetharaman, K.N., Ganesan, N., Kuppuswamy, G., Finite element mod-

elling of heat transfer analysis in machining of isotropic materials, International Journal of

Heat and Mass Transfer, 43 (1999), 1569–1583.

[95] Ng, E.-G., Aspinwall, D.K., Brazil, D., Monaghan, J., Modelling of temperature and forces

when orthogonally machining hardened steel, International Journal of Machine Tools and

Manufacture, 39 (1999), 885–903.