0
Research Papers

Micromilling Responses of Hierarchical Graphene Composites

[+] Author and Article Information
Bryan Chu

Graduate Research Assistant
Department of Mechanical Aerospace
and Nuclear Engineering,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
110 8th Street,
Troy, NY 12180
e-mail: chub3@rpi.edu

Johnson Samuel

Assistant Professor
Department of Mechanical Aerospace
and Nuclear Engineering,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
110 8th Street,
Troy, NY 12180
e-mail: samuej2@rpi.edu

Nikhil Koratkar

Professor
Department of Mechanical Aerospace
and Nuclear Engineering,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
110 8th Street,
Troy, NY 12180
e-mail: koratn@rpi.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Manufacturing Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING. Manuscript received April 24, 2013; final manuscript received August 20, 2014; published online November 26, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Burak Ozdoganlar.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 137(1), 011002 (Feb 01, 2015) (9 pages) Paper No: MANU-13-1181; doi: 10.1115/1.4028480 History: Received April 24, 2013; Revised August 20, 2014; Online November 26, 2014

The objective of this research is to examine the micromachining responses of a hierarchical three-phase composite made up of microscale glass fibers that are held together by an epoxy matrix, laden with nanoscale graphene platelets (GPL). To this end, micromilling experiments are performed on both a hierarchical graphene composite as well as on a baseline two-phase glass fiber composite without the graphene additive. The composite microstructure is characterized using transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) methods. Tool wear, chip morphology, cutting force, surface roughness, and fiber–matrix debonding are employed as machinability measures. In general, the tool wear, cutting forces, surface roughness, and extent of debonding are all seen to be lower for the hierarchical graphene composite. These improvements are attributed to the fact that GPL improve the thermal conductivity of the matrix, provide lubrication at the tool–chip interface, and also improve the interface strength between the glass fibers and the matrix. Thus, the addition of graphene to a conventional two-phase glass fiber epoxy composite is seen to improve not only its mechanical properties but also its machinability.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Gary, A. C., and Mai, Y.-W., 1988, “Failure Mechanisms in Toughened Epoxy Resins—A Review,” Compos. Sci. Technol., 31(3), pp. 179–223. [CrossRef]
Cohen, R. E., and Argon, A. S., 2003, “Toughenability of Polymers,” Polymer, 44(19), pp. 6013–6032. [CrossRef]
Yavari, F., Rafiee, M. A., Rafiee, J., Yu, Z.-Z., and Koratkar, N., 2010, “Dramatic Increase in Fatigue Life in Hierarchical Graphene Composites,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2(10), pp. 2738–2743. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Yavari, F., 2012, “Graphene Nano-Devices and Nano-Composites for Structural, Thermal and Sensing Applications,” Ph.D. dissertation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Komanduri, R., 1997, “Machining of Fiber-Reinforced Composites,” Mach. Sci. Tech., 1(1), pp. 113–152. [CrossRef]
Sakuma, K., and Seto, M., 1983, “Tool Wear in Cutting Glass Fiber Reinforced Plastics—The Relation Between Fiber Orientation and Tool Wear,” Bull. JSME, 26(218), pp. 1420–1427. [CrossRef]
Che, D., Saxena, I., Han, P., Guo, P., and Ehmann, K. F., 2014, “Machining of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastics/Polymers: A Literature Review,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 136(3), p. 034001. [CrossRef]
Park, K.-H., Beal, A., Kim, D., Kwon, P., and Lantrip, J., 2013, “A Comparative Study of Carbide Tools in Drilling of CFRP and CFRP-Ti Stacks,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 136(1), p. 014501. [CrossRef]
Davim, J. P., Silva, L. R., Festas, A., and Abrão, A. M., 2009, “Machinability Study on Precision Turning of PA66 Polyamide with and without Glass Fiber Reinforcing,” Mater. Design, 30(2), pp. 228–234. [CrossRef]
Calzada, K. A., Samuel, J., Kapoor, S. G., DeVor, R. E., Srivastava, A. K., and Iverson, J., 2010, “Failure Mechanisms Encountered in Micro-Milling of Aligned Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers,” Trans. NAMRI/SME, 38, pp. 221–228.
Calzada, K. A., Kapoor, S. G., DeVor, R. E., Samuel, J., and Srivastava, A. K., 2011, “Modeling and Interpretation of Fiber Orientation-Based Failure Mechanisms in Machining of Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composites,” J. Manuf. Processes, 14(2), pp. 141–149. [CrossRef]
Samuel, J., Dikshit, A., DeVor, R. E., Kapoor, S. G., and Hsia, K. J., 2009, “Effect of Carbon Nanotube (CNT) Loading on the Thermomechanical Properties and the Machinability of CNT-Reinforced Polymer Composites,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 131(3), p. 031008. [CrossRef]
Dikshit, A., Samuel, J., DeVor, R. E., and Kapoor, S. G., 2008, “A Microstructure-Level Material Model for Simulating the Machining of Carbon Nanotube Reinforced Polymer Composites,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 130(3), p. 031110. [CrossRef]
Arora, I., Samuel, J., and Koratkar, N., 2013, “Experimental Investigation of the Machinability of Epoxy Reinforced With Graphene Platelets,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 135(4), p. 041007. [CrossRef]
Jiang, L., Nath, C., Samuel, J., and Kapoor, S. G., 2014, “Estimating the Cohesive Zone Model Parameters of Carbon Nanotube–Polymer Interface for Machining Simulations,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 136(3), p. 031004. [CrossRef]
Rafiee, M. A., Rafiee, J., Srivastava, I., Wang, Z., Song, H., Yu, Z.-Z., and Koratkar, N., 2009, “Fracture and Fatigue in Graphene Nanocomposites,” Small, 6(2), pp. 179–183. [CrossRef]
Bortz, D. R., Heras, E. G., and Martin-Gullon, I., 2012, “Impressive Fatigue Life and Fracture Toughness Improvements in Graphene Oxide/Epoxy Composites,” Macromolecules, 45(1), pp. 238–245. [CrossRef]
Yu, A., Ramesh, P., Itkis, M. E., Bekyarova, E., and Haddon, R. C., 2007, “Graphite Nanoplatelet–Epoxy Composite Thermal Interface Materials,” J. Phys. Chem. C, 111(21), pp. 7565–7569. [CrossRef]
Song, S. H., Park, K. H., Kim, B. H., Choi, Y. W., Jun, G. H., Lee, D. L., Kong, B., Paik, K., and Jeon, S., 2013, “Enhanced Thermal Conductivity of Epoxy–Graphene Composites by Using Non-Oxidized Graphene Flakes With Non-Covalent Functionalization,” Adv. Mater., 25(5), pp. 732–737. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Samuel, J., Rafiee, J., Dhiman, P., Yu, Z.-Z., and Koratkar, N., 2011, “Graphene Colloidal Suspensions as High Performance Semi-Synthetic Metal-Working Fluids,” J. Phys. Chem. C, 115(8), pp. 3410–3415. [CrossRef]
Bhatnagar, N., Ramakrishnan, N., Naik, N. K., and Komanduri, R., 1995, “On the Machining of Fiber Reinforced Plastic Composite Laminates,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 35(5), pp. 701–716. [CrossRef]
Varatharajan, R., Malhotra, S. K., Vijayaraghavan, L., and Krishnamurthy, R., 2006, “Mechanical and Machining Characteristics of GF/PP and GF/Polyester Composites,” Mater. Sci. Eng. B, 132(1), pp. 134–137. [CrossRef]
Zhu, J., Imam, A., Crane, R., Lozana, K., Khabashesku, V. N., and Barrera, E. V., 2007, “Processing a Glass Fiber Reinforced Vinyl Ester Composite With Nanotube Enhancement of Interlaminar Shear Strength,” Compos. Sci. Technol., 67(7), pp. 1509–1517. [CrossRef]
Puw, H. Y., and Hocheng, H., 1999, “Milling of Polymer Composites,” Machining of Ceramics and Composites, S. Jahanmir, M. Ramulu, and P. Koshy, eds., CRC Press, Boca Roton, FL. pp. 267–294.
Zhang, X., Fan, X., Yan, C., Li, H., Zhu, Y., Li, X., and Yu, L., 2012, “Interfacial Microstructure and Properties of Carbon Fiber Composites Modified With Graphene Oxide,” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 4(3), pp. 1543–1552. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lin, J., Wang, L., and Chen, G., 2011, “Modification of Graphene Platelets and Their Tribological Properties as a Lubricant Additive,” Tribol. Lett., 41(1), pp. 209–215. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

High resolution transmission electron microscopy of graphene platelets [14,20].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Microstructural information of the hierarchical three-phase graphene composite

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Micromilling setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Microtool geometry after cutting at a velocity of 62 m/min (note: arrows depict epoxy debris attachments, scale bar = 20 μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Tool wear pattern seen at a cutting velocity of 62 m/min and FPT of 1 μm (close-up of Fig. 4(a), scale bar = 10 μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Morphology of the chips collected at cutting velocity of 30 m/min for various FPT values (scale bar = 100 μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Close-up of Fig. 6 showing fiber failure modes at a cutting velocity of 30 m/min for various FPT values (scale bar = 2 μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Concept of effective fiber failure length for the same depth-of-cut

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

SEM image of the floor of the slot machined at a FPT of 10 μm and a cutting velocity of 30 m/min (scale bar = 10 μm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Cutting force signals and power spectrum at a cutting velocity of 30 m/min and FPT of 1 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Peak-to-valley variation in the cutting forces

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Surface roughness trends

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Surface scan of the top of the slots machined at a cutting velocity of 30 m/min

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Sidewall image taken along the climb milling side of the slot machined at FPT of 1 μm at a cutting velocity of 30 m/min (scale bar = 10 μm)

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