Research Papers

Phenomenological Study of Multivariable Effects on Exit Burr Criteria During Orthogonal Cutting of AlSi Alloys Using Principal Components Analysis

[+] Author and Article Information
Tristan Régnier

Arts et Métiers Paristech Cluny,
Rue porte de Paris,
Cluny 71250, France
e-mail: tristan.regnier@ensam.eu

Guillaume Fromentin

Arts et Métiers Paristech Cluny,
Rue porte de Paris,
Cluny 71250, France
e-mail: guillaume.fromentin@ensam.eu

Alain D'Acunto

Arts et Métiers Paristech Metz,
7 rue Félix Savart,
Metz 57073, France
e-mail: alain.dacunto@ensam.eu

José Outeiro

Arts et Métiers Paristech Cluny,
Rue porte de Paris,
Cluny 71250, France
e-mail: jose.outeiro@ensam.eu

Bertrand Marcon

Arts et Métiers Paristech Cluny,
Rue porte de Paris,
Cluny 71250, France
e-mail: bertrand.marcon@ensam.eu

Arnaud Crolet

Linamar – Montupet,
3 rue de Nogent,
Laigneville 60290, France
e-mail: arnaud.crolet@montupet-group.com

Manuscript received April 12, 2018; final manuscript received June 16, 2018; published online July 9, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Radu Pavel.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 140(10), 101006 (Jul 09, 2018) (10 pages) Paper No: MANU-18-1231; doi: 10.1115/1.4040623 History: Received April 12, 2018; Revised June 16, 2018

During machining, burrs are produced along a part's edges, which can affect a final product lifetime or its efficiency. Moreover, time-consuming and expensive techniques are needed to be applied to remove such burrs. Therefore, companies attempt to reduce burrs formation during machining by manipulating the cutting conditions. This study aims to analyze and quantify the effect of a wide number of parameters on burr formation, resulting from different mechanisms, during orthogonal cutting of AlSi alloys. A highly developed experimental methodology combining high-speed camera recording, laser scanning, and in situ deburring system is used for this study. A statistical analysis is then applied to evaluate relations between controlled parameters and the occurrence of exit burrs morphologies. The results show that the uncut chip thickness influences burr types distribution along the exit edge and chamfer geometry. Among the cutting parameters and tool geometry, tool rake angle is the main parameter affecting burr height. Finally, it is found that none of the burrs geometrical characteristics ranges are piloted by cutting parameters or tool geometry. The assumption of a possible microstructural influence on these outputs is made.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Gillespie, L. K. , and Blotter, P. T. , 1976, “ The Formation and Properties of Machining Burrs,” J. Eng. Ind., 98(1), pp. 66–74. [CrossRef]
Pekelharing, A. J. , 1978, “ Exit Failure in Interrupted Cutting,” Ann. CIRP, 27(1), pp. 5–10.
Iwata, K. , Ueda, K. , and Okuda, K. , 1982, “ Study of Mechanism of Burrs Formation in Cutting Based on Direct SEM Observation,” J. Jpn. Soc. Precis. Eng., 48(4), pp. 510–515. [CrossRef]
Hashimura, M. , Chang, Y. P. , and Dornfeld, D. , 1999, “ Analysis of Burr Formation Mechanism in Orthogonal Cutting,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 121(1), pp. 1–7. [CrossRef]
ISO, 2000, “ Technical Drawings—Edges of Undefined Shape—Vocabulary and Indications,” International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 13715:2000.
Schäfer, F. , Brauner, H. U. , and Breuninger, F. , 1975, “ Entgraten: Theorie, Verfahr, Anlagen,” Krausskopf, Mainz.
Régnier, T. , Fromentin, G. , Marcon, B. , Outeiro, J. , D'Acunto, A. , Crolet, A. , and Grunder, T. , 2018, “ Fundamental Study of Exit Burr Formation Mechanisms During Orthogonal Cutting of AlSi Aluminium Alloy,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 257, pp. 112–122. [CrossRef]
Abushawashi, Y. M. , 2013, “ Modeling of Metal Cutting as Purposeful Fracture of Work Material,” Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
Chern, G.-L. , 2006, “ Experimental Observation and Analysis of Burr Formation Mechanisms in Face Milling of Aluminum Alloys,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 46(12–13), pp. 1517–1525. [CrossRef]
Kishimoto, W. , 1981, “ Study of Burr Formation in Face Milling-Conditions for the Secondary Burr Formation,” Bull. Jpn. Soc. Prec. Eng., 15(1), pp. 51–52.
Bourlet, C. , Fromentin, G. , Harika, E. , and Crolet, A. , 2016, “ Analysis and Modeling of Burr Formation During the Plane Milling of Cast Aluminium Alloy Using PCD Tools,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 138(8), p. 81010. [CrossRef]
Abdi, H. , and Williams, L. J. , 2010, “ Principal Component Analysis,” Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Stat., 2(4), pp. 433–459. [CrossRef]
Lorenz, G. , 1989, “ Principal Component Analysis in Technology,” CIRP Ann., 38(1), pp. 107–109. [CrossRef]
Dubey, A. K. , and Yadava, V. , 2008, “ Multi-Objective Optimization of Nd: YAG Laser Cutting of Nickel-Based Superalloy Sheet Using Orthogonal Array With Principal Component Analysis,” Opt. Lasers Eng., 46(2), pp. 124–132. [CrossRef]
NF EN1706, 2010, “ Aluminium and Aluminium Alloys—Castings—Chemical Composition and Mechanical Properties,” Association Française de Normalisation, France, Standard No. NF EN 1706:2010.
da Silva, L. C. , da Mota, P. R. , da Silva, M. B. , Ezugwu, E. O. , and Machado, Á. R. , 2015, “ Study of Burr Behavior in Face Milling of PH 13-8 Mo Stainless Steel,” CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol., 8, pp. 34–42. [CrossRef]
Hashimura, M. , Hassamontr, J. , and Dornfeld, D. A. , 1999, “ Effect of In-Plane Exit Angle and Rake Angles on Burr Height and Thickness in Face Milling Operation,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 121(1), pp. 13–19. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Experimental sequence of cutting tests

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Burr scanning setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Definitions of the in-plane exit angle and wedge angle (adapted from Hashimura et al. [17])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Different types of burrs obtained during milling (from Chern [9])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Influence of rake angle (a) and (b) and uncut chip thickness (c) and (d) on stress triaxiality distribution (from Abushawashi [8])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Geometrical descriptors for (a) burr without chamfer, (b) burr with chamfer and three-dimensional reconstruction of two samples' exit edges morphologies, exhibiting both burr types (c) and (d), after Régnier et al. [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Poisson burr (a), rollover burr (b), tear burr (c), and cut off burr (d) (adapted from da Silva et al. [16] and Gillespie and Blotter [1])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Experimental setup of the cutting tests using high speed imaging system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Formation of burr with chamfer

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison between both burr types generated with different rake angles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Correlation circle for the first and third axes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Observations contribution graphic for the first and third axes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Correlation circle for the first and second axes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Description of the one-sigma confidence range selection for Bh with and without chamfer

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Observations contribution graphic for the first and second axes



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