0
research-article

Modeling and Analysis of Forces in Laser Assisted Micro Milling

[+] Author and Article Information
Mukund Kumar, Shreyes N. Melkote

George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332

Chia-Jung Chang

Harold and Inge Marcus Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, PA 16802

V. Roshan Joseph

H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA 30332

Contributed by the Manufacturing Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering. Manuscript received October 21, 2012; final manuscript received April 16, 2013; published online July 17, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Y. B. Guo.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 135(4), 041018 (Jul 17, 2013) (10 pages) Paper No: MANU-12-1316; doi: 10.1115/1.4024538 History: Received October 21, 2012; Revised April 16, 2013; Accepted April 17, 2013

Laser assisted micro milling (LAMM) is capable of generating three dimensional microscale features in hard metals with lower cutting forces than conventional micro milling. To maximize the reduction in cutting forces, a mathematical model is required to understand the influence of different laser and machining parameters on the forces. Consequently, a physics-based force model is developed in this paper to predict the cutting forces when micro milling a hard metal using laser assist. LAMM experiments are carried out on 52,100 bearing steel (62 HRc) over a range of feed rates and laser powers to calibrate the force model. The results indicate that the model predicts the cutting force profile with good accuracy. This model is then used to study the influence of laser assist on cutting forces, which yields a better physical understanding of the LAMM process.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Overall LAMM force prediction methodology

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Temperature dependence of the yield and ultimate tensile strengths of 52,100 steel (62 HRc) [27]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Calculated temperature rise due to shear (feed: 6.6 μm/flute, axial depth of cut: 20 μm, spindle speed: 50,000 rpm, no laser assist)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Calculated temperature rise due to laser heating averaged along the depth of cut (20 μm) at discrete points along the tooth path of a 180 μm diameter tool (see Fig. 4) (AISI 52100 steel, laser power: 18 W, scan speed: 660 mm/min, distance between center of laser beam and edge of cutting tool: 200 μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Cutter tooth path indicating the cutting forces; temperature rise is predicted at equispaced points 1–11, 18 deg apart along the tooth path

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of the predicted and measured cutting forces

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Predicted cutting forces with its 95% prediction interval of the validation experiment (depth of cut: 16 μm, and laser power: 18 W): (a) 2.2 μm/flute, (b) 4.4 μm/flute, and (c) 6.6 μm/flute.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of predicted radial (Fr) and tangential (Ft) cutting forces acting on a cutter tooth with and without laser assist over one tool rotation (feed: 6.6 μm/flute, depth of cut: 16 μm, and laser power: 18 W, no runout, β: 48 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Geometry of an end mill (a) front view, and (b) end view showing the elemental forces (suffix “d” refers to dynamometer coordinate system)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Flowchart of the force prediction methodology

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Measurement of runout parameters

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Power spectrum of a measured force signal (feed: 2.2 μm/flute, depth of cut: 16 μm, and laser power: 18 W)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Variation of shear yield strength (MPa), temperature rise ( °C) and uncut chip thickness (mm) for one of the flutes over one full cycle (feed: 6.6 μm/flute, depth of cut: 16 μm, and laser power: 18 W, no runout, β: 48 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of predicted radial (Fr) and tangential (Ft) cutting forces for one of the flutes with and without laser assist over one full cycle (feed: 6.6 μm/flute, depth of cut: 16 μm, and laser power: 35 W, no runout, β: 48 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of predicted radial (Fr) and tangential (Ft) cutting forces for one of the flutes with and without laser assist over one full cycle (feed: 6.6 μm/flute, depth of cut: 16 μm, and laser power: 18 W, runout parameters: A:1.8 μm, B: −0.5 μm, β: 48 deg)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In