Single-Channel MQL

Through-the-tool Minimum Quantity Lubrication (MQL) is often desirable in operations where the toolwork piece interface is not easily accessed by external nozzles, such as deep-hole drilling. Using an
internal (or through the tool) instead of an external lubrication can make a significant difference. For
example, one study found when drilling Ti6A14V that the measured temperatures for MQL internally
through the tool application in drilling process
were 50% smaller than those obtained with MQL
applied with an external nozzle.1
Single-channel MQL is often more attractive
then dual-channel because it requires relatively
little retrofitting of the machine tool, works with
a broad range of spindles, and does not require
the specialized tool holders needed for a
complete dual-channel system.
For single-channel MQL to work a few simple
things are needed: First, you need to make an
aerosol; then you need to push that aerosol
through the spindle, and finally you need to get
it out through the tool. While this is simple in
concept, in practice it is not always so easy.
To better understand what is happening and
how the various settings affect each other, we
will break it down into the three pieces
mentioned above: making the aerosol, pushing
that aerosol through the spindle, and getting the
flow out of the tool.

Fig 1: The three stages to getting a good MQL

output

Go with the flow

To begin you need a little bit of knowledge about the relationship between the force used to push the
aerosol (the pressure), how much of the mixture is moving through the tube (the flow rate), and how
fast it is moving (the velocity).
If you have a good feel for this already, you can skip this basic review and move straight to the next
section, Making the Aerosol. If not, this quick refresher might help.

R. P. Zeilmann, W. L. Weingaertner, Analysis of temperature during drilling of Ti6A14V with minimal quantity of
lubricant, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., vol. 179, pp 124-127, 2006

Unist White Paper: Single Channel MQL

The basic ideas are simple:
1. The harder you push the air in, the faster it will try to come out. The input pressure is the
measure of how hard you are pushing.
2. What goes in one end comes out the other. There are two corollaries to this:
a. Air flowing through a smaller space has to move faster at that point. So if the area of the
opening at the input end is twice the area size of the exit, the air will be moving twice as
fast at the exit as it is at the opening.
b. You can only force so much air through the system at a given pressure. The components
of the system resist this flow, and the harder you push the more they push back. In
other words, they form a back pressure.
The back pressure slows the flow until the incoming flow matches what is actually able to get out. The
system balances the speed of the exiting air and the back pressure so that the flow is the same at both
ends. In our case, constrictions are the largest contributor to the back pressure, and the exit hole at the
tool is usually the tightest constriction.
The key points of this are:
The volume of fluid coming in and going out of the tube will be the same.
Making the area the fluid flows through smaller increases the velocity of the fluid at that point.
Similarly, a larger area decreases the fluid velocity at that point.
A constriction at any point will cause a back pressure which limits the amount of flow through
the entire system. This is why the overall flow is often determined by the smallest constriction.
With this background we are now in a good position to understand the three stages of what is needed
to generate a good single-channel MQL output.

Making the Aerosol

Although it is not where you can easily see it, even in internal MQL there is a nozzle that converts the
separate air and lube streams into the aerosol, and there are several factors that determine how well
this will do its job.
The degree the fluid breaks up into droplets is dependent on the fluids physical properties such as how
much it weighs per ounce or milliliter (density), how easily it flows (viscosity), and how much its
molecules tend to stay together (surface tension). Combine this with the amount you are trying to mix
at once and how fast the two colliding streams are going relative to each other, and you begin to see
why determining droplet size quickly gets complex.
Although we cannot be exact here are a few rules that help:
For a given lube, increasing the velocity of the air at the nozzle decreases the droplet size. The
next section, Pushing the aerosol through the spindle goes into more detail on why droplet
size is important, but smaller droplets are generally better for traveling through the spindle.
2

Unist White Paper: Single Channel MQL

By the Numbers: As a rough approximation, doubling the air velocity at
the nozzle will halve the droplet size.
Airflow rate is driven by the incoming air pressure and the smallest constriction in the airs path
in our circumstances almost always the holes in the tool.
By the Numbers: A very rough approximation is that the velocity is
proportional to the square root of pressure, so doubling the pressure
will increase the velocity to be 1.4 times what it was. Of course as we
mentioned earlier, the constrictions will also cause an increase in the
back pressure so there is only so far you can go with this before
something fails.
Larger oil holes in the tool will allow more airflow and therefore make smaller droplets.
By the Numbers: The area the air can flow through increases with the
square of the holes diameter. So doubling the oil-hole diameter,
assuming this diameter is the tightest constriction, gives four times the
aerosol flow.
The velocity of the air as it hits the fluid is very important in making the droplets. The system airflow
drives the velocity the MQL nozzle can create. There is a threshold airflow which, when dropped below
will create an inadequate aerosol.. Because the tool holes are usually the tightest constriction they often
determine whether or not this will be the case.
Different fluids will make different size drops. The two most significant factors are the viscosity
and the surface tension.
By the Numbers: These get harder to quantify, but cutting the viscosity
in half will make about a 20% decrease in droplet size. Cutting the
surface tension in half will result in about a 25% decrease in droplet
size. Cut them both and it only makes a 40% difference. The effects are
neither linear nor directly additive. But this gives you some idea of how
they affect the output.
Of course, when you start changing the physical characteristics of the fluid you also begin to
change how well it works as a cutting lube. For example, the polar properties of Unists Coolube
are great for making it stick to metals and wet out during the cut. But this also makes it stick
to the sides of the coolant passage and wet out as it moves along there. So what is ideal for an
externally sprayed fluid is not necessarily ideal for through-spindle application.
Like everything else in machining, compromises have to be made. But if, after adjusting the
physical constraints, you still are not able to achieve the desired results, you may be able to
make some fluid changes to help.

Unist White Paper: Single Channel MQL

Pushing the aerosol through the spindle

How well the aerosol moves through the spindle is largely dependent on three things: The droplet size,
the spindle RPM, and the shape of the coolant passage. In the preceding section we discussed the
influences that affect droplet size. When we start looking at how the particles move we discover why
this is important.
Size matters. Many of the spindle effects are related to the particles mass. In general, the smaller
the particle the better it will travel.
By the Numbers: The particle mass goes up with the cube of the droplet
diameter; doubling the droplet diameter will cause it to feel eight times
the force due to RPM. It also makes it 1/8 less willing to change
directions when it is moving along.

When the diameter of the particles are in the 1 to 10 micron rangethey tend to float through tubes
like coolant channels fairly well without wetting on the side. This is exactly what you want in
getting the aerosol through the spindle. Unfortunately this is not so helpful when it comes to the
lubricant sticking to the workpiece. Once again, it is a trade-off.
The faster you go the more size matters. The bigger the particle the more they are affected by the
spindle RPM. The centrifugal force a particle feels depends on both how close it is to the center of
the spindle and its mass.
By the Numbers: In general, a particle that weighs twice as much feels
twice as much force and if the particle is moving at twice the speed it
will feel four times the force.

Straight passages with no turns, cavities, or restrictions are best. Droplets dont like to change their
direction of travel, and the bigger they are the less they like to change. With every turn some of
them will not be able to make it and will hit the side of the coolant passage. The sharper the turn,
the more that will hit. Similarly restrictions will cause more particles to hit the sides as they squeeze
together to make it through. Cavities trap particles and, once again, cause them to wet out on the
sides. All of these contribute to sputtering and inconsistent output.

Unist White Paper: Single Channel MQL

The following chart shows some good guidelines for MQL channels

Fig 2: Guidelines for MQL channels

The more particles cling to the wall of the coolant passage the less consistent the MQL output
will be. When the air is flowing you will get some sputtering and spitting because the particles
stick on the walls until enough gathers together that the airflow can rip them away. When this
happens the larger globule works its way down to the tool, and then comes out as a larger drop
or run. So, even with the ideal channel design you will get some inconsistency in output.
Unfortunately, it gets progressively worse as more fluid sticks to the passage walls due to
channel shape, RPM effects, and the other factors that prohibit the droplets from flowing out.
Not all of the fluid will be stripped from the walls by the airstream. Gravity will eventually take
care of this. So when the tool is changed, or when the machine is sitting, the excess oil will
eventually run out.
This is inherent in a single-channel system. You can minimize the spitting and sputtering, but you
can never fully eliminate it.

Unist White Paper: Single Channel MQL

Getting the flow out of the tool

As mentioned earlier, the tools oil-hole size often dictates
the airflow through the system. Larger sizes allow more
airflow which is usually helpful. MQL flow rates and
volumes differ considerably from those of coolants. The flow
speeds are much higher and the volume much less, so tools
designed for coolant may not be perform well with MQL
delivery. The comparison graphic from Ghring (Figure 3)
illustrates this. The MQL tool has 1/10 the pressure and 200
times the aerosol flow.

Just as in the spindle,

particles are particular
Figure 3: Flow speed comparison
about the geometry of
Figure courtesy of Ghring
the transition at the
tool shank end and the canals of the tool itself. This graphic, again
from Ghring, (Figure 4) shows what the aerosol has to do to flow
into the tool shank. The aerodynamic work they have done at the
shank ensures it does so in a smooth way. Designing for air versus
water, lower versus higher pressure, and high versus low flow
rates make a difference in the optimum shape for the tool shank.

Figure 4: Airflow into tool shank

Figure courtesy of Ghring

Once into the tool there is still one more step to go: exiting. The
angle of the internal channel that carries the mist to the outside
tool edge makes a difference in the dispersion pattern of the
aerosol when it exits. This, in turn, determines how efficiently the
lubricant is delivered to the cutting edge. Optimized exit passages
work to keep the exiting aerosol directed at the cut and to avoid it
spreading over the non-cutting areas of the tool.

So the rule of thumb is

Use tools designed and optimized for MQL whenever possible. This will ensure the internal flow
and external dispersion is as efficient as possible for the air based aerosols used.

Summary
To recap, in single-channel MQL it is important to make a good aerosol, get it through the spindle, and
get it out the tool. You want to have sufficient pressure and airflow to generate droplets of a size that
can travel through the spindle at the RPM needed. You want a coolant passage that is as straight and
smooth as possible, and you want tools that allow the aerosol to get out easily.

Unist White Paper: Single Channel MQL

This is done by adjusting the incoming air pressure and picking tools with a sufficient tool hole size to
allow a good aerosol to be formed, operating in an RPM range that works well with that aerosol, and
whose internal paths are optimized for single-channel MQL.
If these do not work, it is also possible to select a fluid whose physical properties are more favorable.
Although there is probably little you can do to change this if you already have the machine, you can look
at coolant passage and spindle designs to optimize for MQL flows.
Understanding these ideas should allow you to optimize your system for success with single-channel
MQL and enjoy the benefits that come with adopting this green and clean solution.