Predictive Models for Drilling Thrust and Torque - a comparison of three Flank

-
Configurations
E. J . A. Armarego (1). University of Melbourne/Australia; J . D. Wright, Engineer, Government Aircraft Factory,
Melbourne/Australia
Predi cti ve models f or dri l l i ng thrust and torque are presented and compared f or three dr i l l fl ank
The models are based on the mechanics of cutti ng anal ysi s, fundamental machining data
The three fl ank shapes i nvesti gated are
The ef f ects of feed, speed and prominent dr i l l poi nt geometri cal f eatures on the predi cted thrust
The di fferences i n
coni cal fl ank' and the other two fl ank models has also been shown to be small
confi gurati ons.
such as the shear stress and chi p l ength rati o as wel l as the fl ank confi gurati on which af f ects the
basi c tool angl es l i ke normal r:ke at the chi sel edge regi on.
the 'Pl ane Fl ank', the popul ar Coni cal Flank , and the Cl earance pl anes fl ank .
and torque resul ted i n p)ausi bl e and comparable trends f or the three fl ank shapes.
predi cti ons between the
f or the work materi al tested. I n addi ti on, good correl ati on between predi cted and experi mental l y meas-
ured thrusts and torques has been found f or a wide range of condi ti ons.
I t i s shown that provi ded the basi c geometry at the dr i l l cutti ng edges can be esti mated, the more
complex dr i l l fl ank anal yses are not essenti al f or adequate thrust and torque predi cti ons when usi ng
the dri l l i ng anal ysi s presented.
I NTRODUCTI ON
The thrust, torque and power i n dri l l i ng are
i mportant machining performance characteri sti cs re-
qui red f or improvements i n machine tool and dr i l l
desi gns as wel l as f or the sel ecti on of optimum cutt-
i ng condi ti ons. With the expected l arge rises i n the
proporti on of the total avai l abl e producti on t i me
spent i n metal removal when usi ng CNCJDNC machine
tooLs [l] there i s consi derabl e scope f or reducti ons
i n machining costs to of f set the hi gh capi tal i nvest-
ment of modern manufacturi ng systems. Thus the need
f or machining performance data has become i ncreasi ngl y
more i mportant i n manufacturi ng.
The development of methods f or obtai ni ng machin-
i ng performance data i s compl i cated by the numerous
vari abl es to be consi dered. These i ncl ude the many
tool and cut geometri cal vari abl es, the resul tant
cutti ng vel oci ty and the msterial properti es of the
tool and workpiece. The popul ar empi ri cal approach
of obtai ni ng the requi red data di rectl y from experi -
ments usual l y allows f or a few of the more obvious
vari abl es (e.g. feed, speed) f or each work material
and machining operati on tested.
resul ts f or dri l l i ng and other operati ons have been
compiled over years of testi ng L2,3], the seri ous
shortage of data i s evi dent i n the l i terature.
Based on a series of i nvesti gati ons, a mechanics
of cutti ng approach f or predi cti ng the forces and
power i n dri l l i ng and other common operati ons has been
proposed [ 4 ] . Thi s approach i nvol ves the development
of orthogonal and obl i que cutti ng anal yses f or the
machining operati on consi dered. The f orce and power
equati ons deri ved i ncl ude the tool and cut geometri cal
vari abl es, the resul tant cutti ng speed and basi c para-
meters of the cutti ng models. For predi cti on purposes
the basi c cutti ng parameter val ues, such as the shear
stress I and chi p l ength rati o r , are found from
'cl assi cal ' orthogonal cutti ng ei peri ments whi l e the
normal rake angl e and angl e of i ncl i nati on are obtained
from an anal ysi s of the tool geometry and i ts standard
speci f i cati on.
The use of thi s approach f or dri l l i ng forces i s
dependent on a knowledge of the dr i l l poi nt geometry
and i ts speci f i cati on. Although there is consi derabl e
agreement about the general appearance and speci f i cat-
i on of the dr i l l poi nt [2-91 the preci se geometry i s
unknown [9,10]. The geometry at the dr i l l l i ps pre-
sents no di f f i cul ti es, however, the fl ank geometry
which af f ects the chi sel edge regi on i s essenti al l y
unspeci fi ed and dependent on the sharpeni ng method
used. The si mpl est f l ank shape, consi sti ng of a
si ngl e pl ane, has been used wi th consi derabl e success
f or f orce predi cti ons [ll]. From studi es of poi nt
sharpeni ng methods thi s 'Pl ane Flank' shape has been
shown to be unacceptabl e f or general purpose dr i l l
producti on whereas the popul ar coni cal gri ndi ng method
seems most sui tabl e and i s commonly used i n practi ce
[l o]. Neverthel ess, other gri ndi ng methods and f l ank
shapes are al so used i n practi ce [9,10], whi l e
attempts to develop fl ank shapes f or improved dri l l -
l i f e have been reported 1123. I t i s therefore import-
ant to study the ef f ects of di f f erent fl ank shapes on
the thrust and torque.
I n thi s paper predi cti ve models f or dri l l i ng
thrust and torque based on the above approach are pre-
sented and compared f or three fl ank confi gurati ons.
These shapes i ncl ude the yrevi ousl y reported 'Pl ane
fl ank' Ell], the popul ar
Although many usef ul
Coni cal Fl ank' and a
Cl earance Pl anes Fl ank'.
THRUST AND TORQUE ANALYSES
The thrust and torque anal yses f or the three dr i l l
fl ank shapes can be developed by consi deri ng the two
di sti nct regi ons of the dr i l l , namely; the l i p reg-
i on and the chi sel edge regi on.
f i gurati on does not af f ect the l i p regi on the anal ysi s
at the l i ps w i l l be common f or al l the dr i l l fl anks
consi dered. On the other hand separate anal yses f or
the chi sel edge regi on w i l l be necessary f or each
fl ank shape to cater f or di f f erent chi sel edge
geometry.
to that reported earl i er [4.115. Thus as shown i n
Fi g. 1, the deformation process at the l i ps i s treated
as a number of cl assi cal obl i que cutti ng el ements,
each wi th di f f erent normal rake angl e y , i ncl i nati on
angl e x and resul tant cutti ng ve1ocity"V depending
on the hean radi us at each el ement. The gl emental
deformation force components AF AF and AF as wel l
as the el emental edge f orce com%&enes are cgnverted
i nto the el emental thrust ATh and torque AT . By
summing the el emental forces &he total thrush Th and
torque T at the l i ps are establ i shed. I n the l f p
regi on ti e stati c or 'tool ' geometry provi des a suf f -
i ci entl y accurate representati on of the dynamic or
'working' geometry.
Si nce the fl ank con-
The general anal yti cal a proach used i s si mi l ar
The chi sel edge regi on i s al so anal ysed by consi d-
eri ng a number of el ements, however the deformation
process may be consi dered as cl assi cal orthogonal cutt-
i ng wi th hi ghl y negati ve normal rake angl e and low
resul tant cutti ng speed (i . e. the i ncl i nati on angl e x s
can be shown to be zero or very small f or the fl anks
studi ed). I n thi s regi on the dynamic angl es cannot be
i gnored. Further the el emental forces are found from
empi ri cal force/wi dth data obtai ned from negati ve rake
orthogonal cutti ng tests where di sconti nuous chi p
formati on occurs.
confi gurati on i s found by summing the common thrust
and torque at the l i ps to the chi sel edge thrust and
torque of the rel evant dr i l l fl ank shape.
The Lip Region
The sal i ent geometri cal f eatures, el emental f orce
components and vel oci ty vector f or a sel ected element
are shown i n Fi g. 1. For si mpl i ci ty the f ul l deform-
ati on geometry and associ ated cutti ng anal ysi s vectors
(e.g. shear force, shear and chi p vel oci ti es) at each
element are omi tted.
The total thrust and torque f or each dr i l l fl ank
These detai l s may be found i n
[ill.
For any el ement, say the jth element from the
outer corner, the el emental thrust ATh and torque AT
due to the deformation process and the'edge forces ark
gi ven by:
AThtj = 2[(AF +AF )coscsi np - (PFR+BFRE) ( co~A ~C OS~
Q QE
+sinX si np si nc)
AT = 2r(AFp +aFpE)
.ej
where the symbols rel evant to the element consi dered
are descri bed i n the nomencl ature.
l i ps are equal and expressed by
The width of cut Ab f or al l the ML el ements at the
Ab = [Dcosw~-D'cosu']cosAs/(~M~sinp) ( 3)
where w o = sin-l(ZW/D) ( 4 )
(5)
(6)
*' = 7 - $ = $ 1
D' = Lc = 2W/sin(n-p) = 2WJ sinly'
The radi us r at the mid-point of the cutti ng edge of
the j th element i s theref ore:
r = t[Dcoswo/2 - (j -%)AbI 2 +W2)'
( 7)
Annals of the CIRP Vol. 33/1/1984 5
Tr ue vi ew of VW and A2
A S
FI G. 1. Sal i ent Feat ur es
for j t n El ement at t he Li p
Sect i on XX
AFp, AFpE
The cor r espondi ng equat i ons f or t he geomet r i cal quant -
i t i es of t he j t h el ement r equi r ed bef or e usi ng equat -
i ons (1) and (2) can be shown to be
w = si n- l (W/ r) (8)
5 = tan- ' [tanwcosp] (10)
(12)
6 = t an- 1[ 2r t an60/ D] (9)
asD = is = si n- l [si np si nw] (11)
yr ef = tan-1[tan6cosw/(sinp-cosp si nw t an61
'nD
t = f si np cosc/ 2
= ' n = ' ref -
AI L =Ab/ cosi (15)
AA = t Ab (16)
Fr omt he si ngl e edge obl i que cut t i ng anal ysi s [4. 13]
appl i ed to each el ement t he def or mat i on f or ce compon-
ent s and basi c cut t i ng par amet er s ar e r el at ed by t he
expr essi ons
A F ~ = TAA[ COS( A~- Y~) COSA~+t anncsi nhssi nl n] / B (17)
AFQ = TAA si n(An- yn)/ B (18)
A F ~ = TAA[ cos ( A~- Y~) s ~~X~ - t annccoshscosXn] / B (19)
tan+, = r~(cos~C/cos~s)cos~n/[l-r~(cosnc/cos~s)si~
t a n . ! , = t anAcosnc (20)
tan(+,+An) = tanascosyn/(tannc-sinyntanis) (22)
( 21 r'
wher e
B = [cos2($n+hn -yn) +tan2ncsin2hn]4sin$ncoshs (23)
The el ement al edge f or ce component s ar e f ound f r om
AFpE =KIP Ab
AFQE = KIQ Ab
AFm
and
= KI R Ab * o
The t hr ust Th and t or que T f or t he whol e l i p r egi on
i s f ound from' the summati on' of al l t he el ement s, 1. e.
Combi ni ng t he above equat i ons suggest s t hat t he t ot al
l i p t hr ust ThI L and t or que TIL may be expr essed as
Th, and T, = f unct i ons (D, 2W, 2p, d o , 4 , f , M,, 'I,
r I L, 1. Kl p8 K l Q) (29)
For quant i t at i ve f or ce pr edi ct i ons al l t he above var -
i abl es must be known or f ound. The f i r st si x quant i t -
i es r epr esent t he known speci f i ed dr i l l poi nt f eat ur es
and t he f eed f , whi l e M i s sel ect ed to adequat el y
al l ow f or t he var i at i on4 i n cut t i ng geomet r y wi t h r ad-
i us al ong t he l i ps. The r emai ni ng f i ve basi c quant i t -
i es ar e f ound f r omt he cl assi cal or t hogonal dat a at t he
appr opr i at e condi t i ons f or each el ement der i ved f r om
t he f i r st seven var i abl es i n equat i on (29). For any
gi ven wor k mat er i al , t he basi c cut t i ng quant i t i es,
e. g. r , wi l l depend on t he nor mal r ake angl e y =
a r esuf t ant cut t i ng speed V . For exampl e, wheR ynD
cut t i ng 1020 St eel [ l l ] t heef ol l owi ng equat i ons have
been f ound f r ommul t i - var i abl e r egr essi on anal ysi s of
or t hogonal cut t i ng t est dat a:
r = 0. 3427 . 00292 y + . 00315 V (30)
T ' = 512. 9~10~ - 1. 319 xnD106y ( N/ m2y (31)
A = 32. 84 + , 559 Y - (de@ee) (32)
= 84 280 - 1, 397 (N/;) . ( 33j
El p = 631100 - 716 ynD ( N/ m) ( 3 4 )
1Q
The Chi sel Edge Regi on f or t he Pl ane Fl ank Dr i l l
consi st s of a st r ai ght chi sel edge per pendi cul ar to
t he dr i l l axi s bounded by t he t wo pl ane f l anks as
shown i n Fi g. 2. The st at i c nor mal r ake angl e y i s
negat i ve, const ant and numer i cal l y equal t o hal f nt he
wedge angl e y at t he chi sel edge f or al l r adi i .
Si mi l ar l y t hewst at i c nor mal cl ear ance angl e a
const ant and equal to t he compl ement of y
r adi i .
f or al l r adi i as evi dent i n Fi g. 2. From'a geomet r i c
anal ysi s of t he Pl ane Fl ank dr i l l t he wedge angl e 2y
i s r el at ed t o t he speci f i ed poi nt angl e 2p and chi sey
edge angl e $ onl y [10,11] s o t hat when t he r esul t ant
cut t i ng speed angl e n i s al l owed f or , t he dynami c
angl es y and a can be f ound and wi l l var y wi t h t he
r adi us w%!le &hen8ynami c i ncl i nat i on angl e A s D i s
const ant at 0 . The r el evant equat i ons ar e
For t he Pl ane Fl ank dr i l l t he chi sel edge r egi on
i s
f op al l
The st at i c angl e of i ncl i nat i on Aw i s zer o
YnD = n - Yw (35)
anD = (90 - yw) - n (36)
yw = tan- ' [tanpsi n(n- $)] = tan-' [tanpsi n$' ](37)
n - tan- l [Vf / Vw] = tan-' [f / 2nr] (38)
wher e
Fi g. 2. Chi sel Edge Geomet r y - Pl ane Fl ank Dr i l l
( i . e. i n t he r egi on r <rcD' /2= Lc/ 2) and an i n-
The cgt t i ng act i on consi st s of or t hogonal cut t i ng when
u >O
d8kat i on pr ocess when u 1. e. Ocr zr . However
si nce r i s a ver y smal l "1r opor t i on of t ge cki sel edge
l engt h L[l l ] t he l at t er pr ocess can be negl ect ed.
For any kt h el ement f r omt he chi sel edge cor ner
as shown i n Fi g. 2, t he el ement al chi sel edge t hr ust
AThPt and t or que AT^^ ar e expr essed as
wher e AF and AF ar e t he ei ement al f or ce component s
consi st i & of t heQEombi ned def or mat i on and edge f or ce
component s. The wi dt h of cut Ab f or al l t he M el em-
ent s wher e or t hogonal cut t i ng occur s ar e equal' and
gi ven by
wher e r t he r adi us r and cut t hi ckness t at t he
mi dpoi nk' of el ement k ar e f ound f r om:
Ab = [Lc - 2rL]/ 2Mc = [D' - 2rL]/ 2Mc
( 41)
r L = f t anp si n$' / Zn (42)
6
r - L /2 - (k - &)&b
t - fCcosrl/2
(43)
(44)
From orthogonal cutti ng consi derati ons
A F ~ ~ = [FpC/b]Ab = ClpAb (45)
A F ~ ~ - [F / b] ~b = CIQPb (46)
QC
The total chi sel edge thrust Th
the orthogonal cutti ng regi on i g therefore:
k=Mc k=Mc
and torque Tc due to
ThC - k:l AThck ; Tc = kil ATck
( 47) I (48)
Combining the above equati ons the chi sel edge thrust
and torque f or the Pl ane Flank dr i l l become
=
ThC and Tc functi ons (2W, 2p, w , f , Mc, Cl p.
1Q) (49)
For quanti tati ve predi cti on purposes the three speci f-
i ed dr i l l poi nt features 2W, 2p and $, the feed f and
M are known or sel ected whi l e C and C are found
ffom cutti ng data at the condi ti hks rel e@nt to each
element. For 1020 steel [ll] C and C are rel ated
to the cut si ze and rake angl e &ordi ni Qto the
equati ons :
ClP - [FpC/b] = 1. 188x106t'651(90+)0 nD) '06
CIQ = [FQC/b] = 19.14x106t'635(90+f' nD )-'620
(50)
(51)
The Chi sel Edge Region f or the Clearance Planes Flank
The thrust and torque anal ysi s f or thi s dr i l l
fl ank confi gurati on i s essenti al l y similar to that f or
the Pl ane Flank dr i l l except that the rel evant angl es
e.g. y . y should be used. The sal i ent geometry is
shown f n ri g. 3. The chi sel edge regi on i s represent-
ed by a strai ght chi sel edge perpendi cul ar to the dri l l
axi s bounded by two pl anes i n the vi ci ni ty of the
chi sel edge. The fl ank adj acent to each l i p is al so a
pl ane i ncl i ned by the l i p cl earance angl e CL at the
outer corner. The corresponding pl anes at t8e l i p and
chi sel edge f or each dr i l l fl ank i ntersect at a l i ne
through the chi sel edge corner and perpendi cul ar to
the chi sel edge as shown i n Fi g. 3. Hence the l i p
cl earance angl e CL and the chi sel edge stati c normal
cl earance angl e an at the chi sel edge corner are
equal .
angl e a as wel l as the wed e angle"2y are constant
f or a1l"points on the chi sef edge. Bovh stati c and
dynamic i ncl i nati on angl es x and X D, respecti vel y,
are Oo so that the cutti ng agti on i 8 orthogonal wi th
hi ghl y negati ve rake angl es when a >O. From the
geometri cal anal ysi s of the dr i l l @Tnt the l i p cl ear-
ance angl e CL at any radi us r on the l i p i s given by
tanC!. = cotpsinw+coswsecwo[tanCeo-(2W/D)cotp] (52)
A t the chi sel edge corner w=w'=n-) and the l i p cl ear-
ance angl e Ca equal s an hence from equati on (52)
tanan = cotpsiny-cosdsecwo [tanCao- (2WID) cotp]
and from Fi g. 3 the wedge angl e 2yw and stati c normal
rake y, are given by
The stati c normal rake angl e a and cl earance
(53)
2yw = n - 2an (54)
Y, = -rw (55)
The l i mi ti ng radi us rL when anD = 0 i s expressed as
(56)
f coso
rL = ~n~cotpsin$coswo-cos~~tanCeo-2Wcotp/D] ]
The chi sel edge thrust and torque can be predi cted
from the previ ous equati ons (35) to (51) provided yw
and r from equati ons (53) ( 54) and (56) are used
i nstekd of those from equati ons (37) and (42).
general expressi on f or ThC and Tc comparable to
equati on (49) are
Thc and Tc = functi ons (2W.2p,~,CLo,f,Mc,Clp,ClQ) (57)
By adding the total chi sel edge thrust and torque to
the correspondi ng val ues at the l i ps the thrust and
torque f or the Clearance Planes Flank dr i l l as a whole
i s obtai ned.
The Chi sel Edge Region f or the Conical Flank D r i l l
The chi sel edge thrust and torque anal ysi s f or
the coni cal fl ank dr i l l i s al so si mi l ar to that f or
the Plane Flank dr i l l al though the geometri cal anal -
ysi s f or the cl earance, rake and wedge angl es at each
element i s more i ntri cate than f or the Pl ane Flank
dri l l . A s shown i n Fi g. 4 and di scussed i n [9.10]
the chi sel edge onl y approximates a strai ght l i ne. The
i ncl i nati on angl es A and a are very small f or al l
poi nts on the chi sel sedge sb that the process may be
consi dered to be orthogonal cutti ng i n the regi on
a 20. Therefore the stati c normal rake and normal
c%.rance angl es may be approximated by the rel evant
angl es i n the secti oni ng pl anes such as AA i n Fi g. 4.
Since the coni cal fl anks i n the vi ci ni ty of the chi sel
edge may act as faces or fl anks, the angl e between the
tangent to the cone 2 fl ank and the pl ane normal to
The
SECTI ON AA
SECTION BB
FI G.3. Chi sel Edge Geometry -
Clearance Planes Flank Vw
SECTION AA
Cone 2 Apex
2.-
FI G.4. Chi sel Ed e Geometry - Cone 1 Apex
the dr i l l axi s i n Fi g. 4 represents a whi l e the
correspondi ng angl e wi th respect to c8ne 1 i s the
complement of I y 1 (i .e. 9O-ly I ). Both a and a
wi l l vary al ong Phe chi sel edgg as do y, a8d Y,,, FBI.
Conical dank
.I"
From the coni cal gri ndi ng anal ysi s [9] the equat-
i ons of the chi sel edge and the two dr i l l l i ps are
gi ven by
si necose 2 si necose 1,
Y[-CxCy(sinxcosx)2 + '(cxcy) ( - 1
. ~,2(cos2e - cos2x)cos2e
(59)
(60)
x = -W/cosXg - ytana f or l i p 1
x = ~/ cosh - ytanXg f or l i p 2
where B , x . X C and C are the coni cal gri ndi ng method
parameters .g'ByXnumerieally sol vi ng equati on (58) and
(59) or (60) tho chi sel edge corner radi us rc- Lc/2
and i ts x,y co-ordi nates can be found.
cl earance angl e an on the fl ank produced by cone 2 i s
given by:
tanan = -COSY " C tank z+tan$ " (cos2 x - si n2 x tan28 )
- tanv2 tany" si nxcosxsec2e]
+[ tam2 (si n2 x - cos2xtan2e)+sin~cosxsec2e ] (61)
g g
A t a radi us r as i n Fi g. 4 the stati c normal
where
tan$" =x/y (62)
tanhz = (63)
and sin%osXsec20 - Jsec*x2(cos2Xsec2e-l)+sin2xsec2e
tanvz =
By symmetry the angl e corresponding to a
(61) f or the cone 1 fl ank represents thencomplement
of I y 1 i .e. 90 - l yn( .
cX +(x2+y2)'sin*"
c - (x2+yz)%osy"
cX +r sin*"
C~ - r cosq'l
-
Y
(64)
1 - cos2x sec2e
i n equati on
Hence by repl aci ng ( 9 0 - ( y 1 ,
an8 u1 f or an,az and V P i n equati ons (61) and ( %4)
7
where i s gi ven by
tanhl =
Cx - r cosv"
-I. r si n,"
Y
expressi ons f or the cal cul ati on of ' i are found. The
dynamic normal rake and cl earance angl es, and the
wedge angl e 2vw are
Y nD = n - i Y n / (66)
anD = an - (67)
2vw = n / 2 - un + j Y n/ (68)
Because of the complexity of the above equati ons
the l i mi ti ng radi us r , where a i s zero i n equati on
(67) i . e. a
equati on. f nstead, numeri cal methods must be used
i nvol vi ng equati ons (58)(61) to (64) to obtai n r and
a as wel l as equati on (38) f or I i n each i nterati on.
FP%mequati on (58) to (67) the above anal ysi s together
wi th equati ons (38) to (41), (43) to (51) from the
Pl ane Flank anal ysi s the el emental and total chi sel
edge thrust and torque can be eval uated. I t i s i nter-
esti ng to note that f or the coni cal f l ank the equati on
comparable to equati on (49) is
Thc and Tc = functi ons ( 2 W , 2 p , ~ , C r , , D , 6 , f , M ~ ~ ~ , C ~ ~ )
For predi cti on purposes the dr i l l speci f i cati on f eat-
ures 2W,2p,w,Ce , D as wel l as the coni cal gri ndi ng
parameter e muse be known.
reports [9.10] the usual method of speci fyi ng the dr i l l
poi nt i nvol vi ng the f i r st f i ve vari abl es i n equati on
(69) are not suf f i ci ent to uni quel y determi ne the con-
i cal gri ndi ng parameters s o that one of these parameters
0 must be presel ected. The feed f , M and basi c cutt-
i ng data C and C need to be known'as f or the other
fl ank shap& consi h?red.
Again by summing the chi sel edge and l i p thrusts
and torque the val ues f or the dr i l l as a whole can be
obtai ned.
COMPARISON OF MODELS AND PREDICTIONS
= q , cankot be exp@ssed by a si ngl e
(69)
A s noted i n previ ous
A qual i tati ve comparison of the three fl ank con-
f i gurati ons has been made from consi derati ons of the
above anal yses and the predi cted thrust and torque
trends. For quanti tati ve comparisons the magnitude
of the predi cted and experi mental thrust and torque
have been obtai ned f or a 1020 steel workpiece wi th the
characteri sti cs gi ven i n equati ons (30) to (34) and
(50) (51).
Due to the complexity of the dri l l i ng process
geometry the three models necessi tate computer assi st-
ance f or thrust and torque predi cti ons. I t i s al so
evi dent that al l the models al l ow f or the many geomet-
ri cal dr i l l poi nt f eatures, the feed and the cutti ng
speed V (when the basi c cutti ng parameters i n equat-
i on (307 are used). Combining equati ons (29) and (49)
the total thrust and torque f or the Pl ane Flank model
can be expressed by:
Th, and Tt = functi ons (D, 2W, 2p, 60, c , f , MQ, M
T I , rQ, A . Kip. KlO. Cl p. Clo) P i O )
Thus f or the Pl ane Flank dr i l l da. i s not'i ncl uded i n
the model. For thi s dr i l l fl ank Zhape the common
dr i l l speci f i cati on gi ven by D, 2 w, 2p, 6 4 and Cr
i ncl udes a redundant f eature ( i . e. the dri 'i i shape i so
over-speci fi ed) and CP i s dependent on the other
f eatures 2p, 2W, D andow [10,11]. Further thi s dr i l l
shape has unacceptabl y hi gh C t val ues (230 to 35O)
when al l the other f eatures lie'within the recommended
val ues f or general purpose dri l l s [l o].
The correspondi ng total thrust and torque funct-
i ons f or the 'Cl earance Pl anes Fl ank' dr i l l i s:
Tht and Tt = functi ons (D, 2W, 2p, 6
Thi s dr i l l fl ank shape al l ows f or al l the si x speci fi ed
dr i l l poi nt f eatures so that the geometry i s uni quel y
descri bed i n the vi ci ni ty of the l i ps and chi sel edge.
Thi s approximate representati on of the dr i l l geometry
can appl y f or a vari ety of fl ank shapes away from the
cutti ng edge wi thout af f ecti ng the force predi cti ons.
For the coni cal fl ank dr i l l the total thrust and
torque functi ons become :
Th, and Tt = functi ons (D, 2W. 2p, S o , $,Ce , e
Although al l the si x prominent dr i l l poi nt f eatures
are i ncl uded these do not uni quel y descri be the dr i l l
poi nt geometry generated by the coni cal gri ndi ng
method 191. Thus one of the gri ndi ng parameters such
as the semicone angl e a must be known or sel ected and
could af f ect the thrust and torque as noted i n equat-
i on (72). This model i s a usef ul representati on of
many popul ar dr i l l poi nt gri nders when these are set
accordi n to the strai ght l i p desi gn concepts reported
i n C9.147.
dr i l l and cut geometry have been compared f or the
w. Cro, f ,
MI , Mc, 7 , rr,A, Kip, tiQ, Cl p, CI Q (71)
f , Ma. Mc, T , rrBA,KI P, KI P, Cyp.blQ) (73
The thrust and torque trends wi th vari ati ons i n
three fl ank models. Using a typi cal dr i l l speci f i cat-
i on (D - 12.78 m, 2W/D = .14, 2p = 120, p = 1300,
1 = 300 and Cr = 120) each vari abl e was independent-
18 al tered over'a wide range (e.g. 2p from 1100 to
1400, 6 from 200 to 350) and the thrust and torque
when dri l l i ng 1020 steel were noted. The three models
gave very si mi l ar trends f or al l the common vari abl es
i n the anal yses. For al l the fl ank shapes the total
thrust Th i ncreased wi th i ncreases i n D. 2W/D. and $
(except f &r the Pl ane Flank where 'r' had l i t t l e ef f ect)
and decreases i n hel i x angl e 6 . For the cl earance
pl anes f l ank and coni cal f l ank'dri l l s, very smal l i n-
creases i n thrust occurred as the l i p cl earance angl e
Cr decreased whi l e i ncreases i n e (35O - 500) onl y
magginally i ncreased the thrust (<3I ) f or the coni cal
fl ank dri l l . For the total torque T , al l three
models showed that T i ncreased as DF 2W/D i ncreased
and 2p, d and 4 dec$eased. The l i p cl earance angl e
CI had l f ttl e ef f ect on T f or the two rel evant
drel l fl ank shapes whi l e athad no di scernabl e ef f ect
on T f or the coni cal fl ank dr i l l . Thus consi derabl e
qual Etati ve agreement between the three models has
been found when the common vari abl es are consi dered.
Further, the trends f or the main vari abl es D, 2W/D,
6 and 2p are consi stent wi th the few experi mental
tgends reported i n [2].
I n view of the monotonic trends i n Th and T
empi ri cal type equati ons i ncl udi ng the fee& and d k l l
poi nt f eatures have been obtai ned. The computer
programme f or the three models has been used to
generate thrust and torque val ues from which mul ti -
vari abl e regressi on anal ysi s was used to curve f i t
the data. For each model three l evel s were sel ected
f or each main vari abl e f , D, 2W/D, 2p,$, 6 and Cr
together wi th two l evel s of 8. A total of0729 (369,
2187 (3') and 4374 (2x3') combinations have been used
to produce data f or the pl ane f l ank, cl earance pl anes
fl ank and coni cal f l ank models, respecti vel y.
The resul ti ng empi ri cal type equati on f or the 1020
steel are:
Pl ane Flank D r i l l
Th, = 99. 71f.546 D1'OZ7(2W/D) '279(Zp) '518
= 3.71f.661 D2.004 2p-'226
(73)
-.210 +.050
6 0
(2W/D)
$
T t
(74)
-.263 - .I 77
Cl earance Pl anes Flank D r i l l
Th, = 6.11 f.515 D1.068(2W/D)'
433(2p).467 -.211
0
(75)
+.730 -.043
c e O
6 0 Q
Tt = 4.98 f .656 D ~ . ~ ~ ~ ( ~ w , D ) . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ) - . ~ ~ ~
(76)
-.290 -.213
Coni cal Flank D r i l l
Tht = 14.42 f *548 D1'008(2W/D)'369(2p)'315 60-.197
(77)
.698 -.036
9 cao
0 (78) c C E O
Tt = 5.28 f.658 D2'Oo4 (2W/D).lZ1 (2p)-.222
-.263 -.258 .007
These empi ri cal type equati ons provi de a si mpl er means
of predi cti ng the thrust and force than the more i n-
tri cate models and associ ated computer programmes.
Quanti tati ve comparisons of the predi cti ons f or
the three f l ank confi gurati ons have al so been made.
Based on the recommended range of val ues f or the
speci f i ed dr i l l poi nt f eatures f or general purpose
dri l l s [l o] the extreme val ues of q~ (1200, 1350)
Ceo (8O, 160) 6 (ZOO, 32O), 2W/D (.12, .20) were
used together wfth two l evel s of D (6.35, 25.4 m) and
f (.102, .306 mm/rev). Thus f or each dr i l l fl ank
shape, the predi cted thrust and torque f or 64 (26)
combinations were obtai ned usi ng the rel evant empi ri c-
al -type equati ons above. Pai rwi se comparisons were
made taki ng the coni cal fl ank predi cti on as reference,
e.g. f or the Pl ane Flank dr i l l the percentage di f f er-
ence i n predi cti ons i s expressed as
E =
(Tht or Tt)Pl ane Flank-(Tht or Tt)Coni cal Flank
(Tht or Tt) Coni cal Flank
x 100 (79)
The average percentage di f f erence E f or the 64 com-
bi nati ons has al so been used f or comparison purposes.
gi ven i n Fi g. 5. I t is apparent that the three
models yi el d very similar thrust and torque val ues.
The average percentage di f f erence E f or the Pl ane
Flank and Cl earance Pl anes Flank dr i l l s wi th respect
The hi stograms f or the E val ues and the E are
8
._ ---
30 r
2or- 10
f = 5.4%
'i mRd
II I h
10 14 2-6 - 2 2 6 10 14 18
Pl ane Flank-Conical Flank Cl earance Pl anes Flank -
7. obs
Conical Flank
Je = 1.4% J E = 0. 7%
30 r
10 2ol
0
- 1 0 1 2 3 % - 1 0 1 2 3
FI G.5. Comparison of Predi cti ons based on Coni cal
to the coni cal fl ank are a low 3.3% and 5.4%. resnect-
Flank Model.
i vel y.
15%. The torque comparisons show even smal l er %
di fferences wi th E of 1.4% and .7% f or the Pl ane
Flank and Cl earance Pl anes Flank dri l l s comparisons
respecti vel y, wi th al l - E val ues less than 3%. The
sl i ghtl y hi gher E and E val ues f or the thrust than
the torque are reasonabl e si nce the chi sel edge and
i ts geometry contri butes a hi gher proporti on of the
total thrust than the total torque. Neverthel ess,
the three fl ank models gi ve comparable predi cti ons
when appl i ed to general purpose dri l l s.
and experi mental thrust and torque has al so been made
usi ng the coni cal fl ank model as reference-Ei ght
dr i l l s wi th a wide range of dr i l l poi nt f eatures
i l : 117.7' - 137.40; C!, : 12.6' - 20;9O, 6 . 10.7-30.89
have been sel ected fro& batches of as pr8duced man-
ufactured dri l l s and tested on 1020 steel at three
feeds (. 102, .204 and .306 mm/rev) and one speed of
18. 3 m/min. For each test condi ti on f i ve cuts were
taken to improve the esti mate of the measured thrust
and torque. The percentage di fference i n predi cti on
i .e. ((Predi cted-Experi mental ) x lOO/Experimental) and
i ts average val ue f or thrust and torque have been used
to assess the model. Very reasonabl e correl ati on
between predi cted and experiment val ues have been
found. For the dr i l l on a whole, the average percent-
age di f f erence i n predi cti on was - 7.9% f or the thrust
and -2.2% f or the torque usi ng a semi cone angl e e =
3 5 ' . The i ndi vi dual percentage di f f erence was wi thi n
20% f or the maj ori ty of the thrust and al l but two of
the test condi ti ons f or the torque. These resul ts
compare favourabl y wi th si mi l ar comparisons wi th a
di f f erent set of dri l l s [ll]. Further i nformati on on
these resul ts i s gi ven i n [15] but the f ul l detai l s
w i l l be publ i shed i n a l ater paper. I t i s i nteresti ng
to note that the dr i l l fl ank shapes of most of the
'as produced' general purpose dri l l s tested cannot be
guaranteed to be coni cal fl ank dri l l s. Neverthel ess
the measured chi sel edge wedge angl es 2y at the dr i l l
dead centre were wi thi n 60 of the predi cred val ues
used i n the coni cal fl ank model which ranged from
104.6O to 112.3O.
ment between the three fl ank models as shown i n
equati ons (73) to (78) and the hi stogram i n Fi g. 5,
it i s evi dent that the other two f l ank models w i l l
yi el d si mi l arl y acceptabl e correl ati on wi th the
experi mental thrust and torque as noted f or the con-
i cal f l ank model. Thus f or force (and hence power)
predi cti ons, any of the three models may be used.
However, the choi ce of the most appropri ate model i s
open to some debate. The Pl ane Flank model i s the
si mpl est of the three but excl udes Ca. . The coni cal
fl ank model i s the most complex model'considered and
the semi-cone angl e e shoul d be known. Fortunatel y,
any reasonabl e esti mate of e w i l l suf f i ce f or f orce
predi cti ons al though e may become i mportant f or other
performance measures such as dri l l - l i f e. The Clear-
ance Pl anes Flank model i s appeal i ng due to the rel at-
i vel y si mpl e geometry which i ncl udes al l the commonly
speci f i ed dr i l l poi nt f eatures. The preferred model
may be the one which adequatel y descri bes the chi sel
edge geometry and i ncorporates the speci f i ed dr i l l
poi nt f eatures of rel evance to the forces i n dri l l i ng.
The 'Cl earance Pl anes Fl ank' model seems the most
sui tabl e of the three models studi ed parti cul arl y
si nce the actual dr i l l fl ank geometry of manufactured
dr i l l s i s not preci sel y known or standardi sed.
coni cal fl ank model i s unnecessari l y complex f or
The percentage di fference E are al l less khan
A quanti tati ve comparison between the predi cted
(D:6.35 - 12. 7 IIUII; 2W/D: .12 - ,228; 2p: 112O - 120.5',
I n view of the qual i tati ve and quanti tati ve agree-
The
force predi cti ons but shoul d be persi sted wi th f or
dr i l l l i f e studi es due to the popul ari ty of thi s dr i l l
poi nt gri ndi ng method.
CONCLUSIONS
based on mechanics of cutti ng anal yses and fundamental
cutti ng data have been developed, compared and tested
f or three dr i l l fl ank confi gurati ons.
the l i p cl earance angl e Cr , the Cl earance Pl anes
Fl ank' model i ncl udes al l ehe si x speci f i ed dr i l l
poi nt f eatures whi l e the 'Coni cal Fl ank' model requi res
the semi-cone angl e e to be known i n addi ti on to al l
the speci f i ed dr i l l poi nt f eatures. Neverthel ess the
three models resul ted i n comparable thrust and torque
predi cti ons when numeri cal l y tested over a wide range
of dr i l l poi nt f eature val ues. Further, good correl -
ati on between predi cted and experi mental data has
been obtai ned.
type thrust and torque equati ons i ncorporati ng the
many dr i l l and cut geometri cal vari abl es have been
establ i shed f or use i n i ndustry.
I t i s shown that provi ded the basi c geometry at
the dr i l l cutti ng edges can be adequatel y modelled,
the mechanics of cutti ng approach can be successful l y
used to predi ct the thrust and torque wi thout resort-
i ng to the more complex dr i l l fl ank geometri cal
anal yses.
Acknowledgement. The f i nanci al support recei ved from
the Austral i an Research Grants Scheme i s greatl y
appreci ated.
Predi cti ve models f or dri l l i ng thrust and torque
I t i s shown that the 'Pl ane FSank' model i gnores
From these i ntri cate anal yses, si mpl er empi ri cal
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
REFERENCES
M.E. MERCHANT, I . E . Aust. I nt. Conf. Prod. Tech.,
Melbourne (1974).
R. TOURRET, "Performance of Metal Cutti ne Tools".
-
Butteworth, London, (1958).
Machining Data Handbook, 3rd Ed., Metcut Research
Associ ates I nc., Ci nci nnati , Ohio, (1980).
E.J .A. ARMAREGO, UNESCO-CIRP seminar on Manuf.
Technology, Si ngapore, (1972).
A.S.T.M.E. 'Tool Engineers Handbook', McGraw H i l l
New York (1958).
METAL CUTTING TOOL INSTITUTE, "Metal Cutti ng Tool
Handbook (1969) .
AMERICAN STANDARD, USAS. B94-11-1967.
AUSTRALIAN STANDARD, AS 2438-1981.
E.J .A. ARMAREGO and A. ROTENBERG, I nt. 3 . Mach.
Tool Des. Res.. 13. 155. 165 and 183 (1973).
E.J .A. ARMAREGO iiiid J .D: WRI GHT, Annais CI kp, 3,
5 (1980).
S. WIRIYACOSOL and E.J .A. ARMAREGO, Annals CIRP,
28, 87 (1979).
KALDOR and E. LENZ, Annals CI Y , 29, 23 (1980).
E. J . A . ARMAREGO and R.H. BROWN, TheTachi ni ng of
Metals", Prenti ce H a l l I nc., New J ersey (1969).
J . D . WRIGHT and E.J .A. ARMAREGO, Annals. CIRP, 2,
1 (1983).
J . D. WRIGHT, Ph.D. Thesi s, Uni versi ty of Melbourne
(1981).
NOMENCLATURE
b - wi dth of cut
C C - coni cal gri ndi ng method parameters
Cx yC
C t 0 - speci f i ed l i p cl earance aggl e at the dr i l l
D,D'- nominal dr i l l di ameter and chi sel edge diameter
- total chi sel edge forces per uni t wi dth of
lp' 'gut al ong and normal to V i n the vel oci ty pl ane
peri phery
- total chi sel edge forces al ong and normal
i n the vel oci ty pl ane
K ,K - edge forces per uni t wi dth of cut at the lip
'Qlong and perpendi cul ar to Vw i n the pl ane
L - chi sel edge l ength (= D' = 2r )
Mi,Mc - sel ected number of el ementscat dr i l l l i p and
2p - speci f i ed dr i l l poi nt angl e
r - radi us at the mid-point of an el emental cutti ng
r - chi p l ength rati o
rL
tL - cut thi ckness
normal to the l i p
chi sel edge
edge
- radi us at the chi sel edge when anD = 0
~ .__
Tc,T,,Tt - torque at the chi sel edge, l i ps and the
whole dr i l l
Thc,Th,,Th - thrust at the chi sel edge, l i ps and the
V e, V f , V w - resul tant, feed and tangenti al vel oci ti es,
2W - web thi ckness at the dr i l l poi nt
un,unD
3, ynD
2ref
twhole dr i l l
respecti vel y
- stati c and dynamic normal cl earance angl es,
respecti vel y
- stati c and dynamic normal rake angl e
- reference rake angl e at the l i ps
- chi sel edge wedge angl e
YW
9
6 , 6 0 - hel i x angl es at any poi nt on t he l i p and at
oA, Ab - el ement al ar ea and wi dt h of cut
cl assi cal obl i ue cut t i ng f or ce compon-
ent s due to dej or mat i on at t he dr i l l
l i p el ement s
- cl assi cal or t hogonal cut t i ng f or ce com-
ponent s due t o def or mat i on and edge
ef f ect s at t he chi sel edge el ement s
- cl assi cal obl i que cut t i ng f or ce
dr i l l l i p el ement s
- Thr ust and t or que at t he kt h el ement at
t he chi sel edge
and edge ef f ect s on t he j t d l i p el ement
out er cor ner
A F ~, A F ~, A F ~ -
nFpC. AFFqC
AFpE, AF
os - el ement al cut t i ng edge l engt h
AThck, ATck
AT .,cThtj - t or ques and t hr ust due to ef or mat i on
5 - r ef er ence angl e at t he l i ps
nc
a - gr i ndi ng cone semi - cone angl e
x - f r i ct i on angl e on t he r ake f ace
? ~Bx1* ~2nor mal f r i ct i on angl e i n pl ane nor mal t o
QE' AFREcomponent s due to edge ef f ect s at t he
I J
n - r esul t ant cut t i ng speed angl e
- chi p f l owangl e on t he r ake f ace f or dr i l l
l i p el ement s
- gr i ndi ng cone gener at or pl an angl es [9]
- st at i c and dynami c angl es of i ncl i nat i on,
cut t i ng edge
r e spec t i vel y
i s ' As D
T - shear st r ess i n shear pl ane
- nor mal shear angl es
z?w',wo - dr i l l web angl es at any poi nt on t he l i p,
t he chi sel edge cor ner and t he out er cor ner ,
r espect i vel y
X - coni cal gr i ndi ng met hod par amet er
I, $J ' - dr i l l speci f i ed chi sel edge angl e and i t s
compl ement , r espect i vel y.
10