Modeling and Prediction of Hole

Khagendra Gupta Profile in Drilling, Part 1:

O. Burak Ozdoganlar
Shiv G. Kapoor
Richard E. DeVor
Department of Mechanical and Industrial
Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, IL 61801-2906
Modeling Drill Dynamics in the
Presence of Drill Alignment Errors
A dynamic deflection model that incorporates the effect of the alignment errors that arise
when a drill is held in the spindle assembly has been developed. The drill is modeled as
an Euler-Bernoulli beam with clamped-free end conditions. Thrust and radial forces were
applied at the free end of the beam. The mechanistic model used to predict these forces
has been enhanced to incorporate the effect of the alignment errors and drill vibrations.
A method has been outlined to measure these alignment errors. The mechanistic model
demonstrates the ability to predict the drill vibrations and the radial forces within 6
percent of the measured vibrations and forces. The effect of these alignment errors on the
drill vibrations and the radial forces has also been studied. 关DOI: 10.1115/1.1536932兴

1 Introduction and other geometric parameters, inevitable drill alignment errors

Hole quality parameters that are generally used to evaluate the
quality of a drilled hole are determined from the hole profile. The
hole profile, in turn, depends on transverse vibrations of the drill
and associated radial forces, both of which are strongly affected
by the alignment errors such as drill axis offset and tilt. The in-
fluence of alignment errors can become substantial when large
length-to-diameter drills are employed. A thorough understanding
of the factors affecting the hole quality, and eventually the predic-
tion of the hole quality, can only be achieved through an under-
standing of influence of the alignment errors on the drill-bit dy-
namics and drilling forces.
The machining literature includes numerous efforts for analyti-
cal and mechanistic modeling of the thrust and torque in drilling
process 关1–5兴. Although thrust and torque have a considerable
effect, the radial forces play the most dominant role in determin-
ing the vibrational behavior of a drill and associated hole quality.
The mechanistic model of Chandrasekharan et al. 关5兴 has been
shown to accurately predict not only the thrust force and torque,
but also the radial forces, such as those arising from drill grinding
errors 共e.g., relative lip-height error兲. This model was then en-
hanced for drilling on parts with non-planar surfaces 关6兴.
Research on the dynamics of drilling process has also been
underway for many years. The effect of drill-geometry parameters
and drill-margin forces on drill vibrations were investigated in
关7–11兴. Some researchers applied finite-element methods for the
prediction of transverse vibrations of drill bits, which enabled not
only the consideration of realistic drill geometries, including
flutes, coolant holes, and web taper, but also the evaluation of
‘‘uniform’’ beam assumption that had been considered in the pre-
vious studies 关12,13兴. Ulsoy et al. have conducted extensive re-
search on modeling of drill dynamics 关12–16兴. The drill was con-
sidered to behave as a pinned-pinned or a fixed-pinned beam
under the influence of moving loads. The effects of rotary inertia
and gyroscopic moments were also included. It was shown that
significant deflections may arise due to gyroscopic effects. More
recently, the above models were extended to include an axial
共thrust兲 load, changing moment of inertia along the length, and
shear deformations 关17兴.
In addition to factors like drill rotary inertia, drill wandering,
can have a significant effect on the dynamics of the drill. These
errors include the offset between the drill and spindle axes, i.e.,
the axis offset, and the tilt of the drill axis with respect to that of
the spindle, i.e., the axis tilt. The well known ‘‘drill runout’’ is the
result of alignment errors as measured at the tip of the drill.
Whereas the static effect of runout on the hole quality has been
investigated 关18 –20兴, a comprehensive dynamic model that ex-
plicitly includes the alignment errors on the vibrations of the drill
and the cutting forces has not been developed.
The objective of this paper is to model the drilling dynamics,
including the drill vibrations and the drilling forces, in the pres-
ence of alignment errors including the parallel axis offset, axis tilt,
drill orientation, and locating angle of the cutting lips. In Part 1 of
this paper a dynamic model for the drill bit under the action of
arbitrary axial and transverse forces in the presence of alignment
errors is developed. Although the model is similar to that devel-
oped in 关15兴, in addition to including the alignment errors, the
boundary conditions were modified from pinned-pinned to fixed-
free, and the thrust and radial forces are applied at the free end. To
accurately model the cutting forces in the presence of alignment
errors and transverse vibrations, the mechanistic cutting-force
model developed in 关5兴 is enhanced. A methodology for the mea-
surement of the alignment errors is outlined. The drill bit dynam-
ics model and the enhanced cutting force model are experimen-
tally validated by comparing the predicted and experimental
vibrations and forces. The paper concludes with an analysis of the
influence of the alignment errors and process conditions on drill
radial forces and vibrations. In Part 2 of this paper a comprehen-
sive model for the hole profile is developed.
2 Model Development
This section introduces the alignment errors associated with the
drill when held in the spindle assembly and develops a new dy-
namic model that incorporates these alignment errors under the
action of thrust and radial forces experienced during drilling. The
drilling force model of 关5兴 is enhanced to include the presence of
the alignment errors and the algorithm used to solve the governing
differential equations of motions 共i.e., the boundary value prob-
lem兲 of the drill is explained.

Contributed by the Manufacturing Engineering Division for publication in the

2.1 Alignment Errors. The alignment errors associated
JOURNAL OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING. Manuscript received with the location of a drill in the spindle are shown in Fig. 1.
Oct. 2001. Associate Editor: T. Kurfess. x-y-z axes with the origin at O defines the spindle frame, where

6 Õ Vol. 125, FEBRUARY 2003 Copyright © 2003 by ASME Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 1 Alignment errors associated with the location of a drill
in the spindle
the z axis coincides with the spindle axis and the x axis points to
the base of the drill B 共i.e., the point where the drill projects out of
the spindle兲. D is a point on the drill axis, and T is the tip of the
drill. The drill plane (E-G-T) is a plane that contains the drill axis
and is orthogonal to the x-y plane. x̄-ȳ-z̄ with its origin at B
defines the drill frame, such that the z̄ axis coincides with the drill
axis, and x̄-z̄ plane lies on the drill plane while ȳ is perpendicular
to the drill plane. A plane parallel to x-y plane passing through D
intersects the spindle axis at S.
The alignment errors are then defined in Fig. 1 as:
1. Linear Offset (e): The linear offset is the distance along the
x axis between the spindle axis and drill base, i.e., between O and
B.
2. Axial Tilt 共␣兲: This is the angle between the drill axis (z̄) and
the line M N created by the intersection of z-x and drill planes.
Such defined, ␣ is the rotation about the ȳ axis.
3. Drill Orientation Angle 共␾兲: This is the angle that the z-x
plane makes with the drill plane. Defined in this manner, ␾ is a
rotation about the line M N in the positive z direction.
The net runout, q(z), at any point D along the axis of the drill
can be obtained by performing a vector sum of SA 共the linear
offset兲 and AD 共the projection of the length of the drill at a point
D on the drill plane兲. Mathematically, the net runout can be ex-
pressed as
q 共 z 兲 ⫽ 冑共 兩 BD 兩 sin ␣ 兲 2 ⫹e 2 ⫹2e 兩 BD 兩 sin ␣ cos ␾ . (1)
Drill orientation angle plays a major role in determining the net
runout at the tip. ␾ is defined to vary between 0 to 180 degrees,
and for positive ␣, the net runout decreases continuously with
increasing ␾.
4. Locating Angle 共␥兲: This is the angle that the cutting lips
make with the direction of the net runout at the tip S ⬘ T 1 , as
denoted in Fig. 2. The locating angle does not alter the net runout
at the tip of the drill. However, it plays a major role in determin-
ing the imbalance of the chip load seen by the two cutting lips and
hence the cutting forces. The locating angle can vary between
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
Fig. 2 The effect of locating angle on the chip load
⫺90 to 90 degrees. It is to be realized that the locating angle is not
strictly an alignment error. In the absence of ␣ and ␾, ␥ ceases to
exist. However, when alignment errors are present, the angle of
the cutting lips relative to the direction of the net runout may be
important.
In this paper the four errors resulting from the misalignment of
the drill and the spindle are introduced as defined above. Two of
these errors, linear offset 共e兲 and axial tilt 共␣兲 can be thought of as
controllable alignment errors. The other two errors, orientation
angle 共␾兲 and locating angle 共␥兲 arise as a result of the presence of
e and ␣ and impact the net runout at the drill tip and its relation-
ships to the cutting lips of the drill.
2.2 Modeling Dynamics of the Drill. This section explains
the procedure adopted to develop the drilling dynamic model for a
rotating drill under the influence of axial and transverse external
forces in the presence of alignment errors. In drilling, these forces
correspond to the thrust and the radial forces. The method used to
derive the boundary value problem for a rotating elastic shaft
simply supported at both ends given in 关21兴 is enhanced to incor-
porate the effect of the alignment errors. In the treatment, the
following assumptions have been made:
• The drill is considered to be a circular beam of an equivalent
cross sectional area;
• The drill cross-section has two axes of symmetry and the
principal moments of inertia about these axes are the same;
• The beam is treated as an Euler-Bernoulli beam and has a
uniform mass distribution;
• The torsional and the axial vibrations of the drill have not
been considered and only the first two modes of the transverse
vibrations of the drill are assumed to be significant.
Earlier research 关10,12,17,20兴 considered the drill to be
clamped at the spindle and pinned at the drill tip. However, it has
been observed through experiments 关20兴 that when radial forces
are present, the tip of the drill vibrates. Here, the drill is assumed
to vibrate freely at the tip and is only restricted by the radial
forces.
In the absence of the alignment errors, the equations of the
motion for the transverse vibrations of a rotating elastic shaft,
considered as a distributed system, can be found in the literature
关21兴. However, in the presence of the alignment errors, the con-
tributions due to the gyroscopic terms and centrifugal terms in
these equations of motion change.
In Fig. 1, the forces experienced during drilling, F x , F y , and
FEBRUARY 2003, Vol. 125 Õ 7
F z , are assumed to act at the tip of the drill. These forces are
determined from thrust force P and radial force components R x
and R y 共which are defined to act on the spindle axis兲 through a
coordinate transformation between spindle and drill frames. The
curved-dotted line denotes the deflected position of the drill axis.
The spindle and drill frames are defined as explained in the pre-
vious section.
The Extended Hamilton’s Principle can be used to derive the
boundary value problem and associated boundary conditions of a
distributed parameter system 关21兴. The derivation here is similar
to that in 关21兴, except that an axial force and the alignment errors
are included here.
Referring to Fig. 1, let D be a point on the undeflected drill
axis, and D ⬘ be the associated point on the deflected drill axis.
The location vector from the spindle base O to D ⬘ can be given as
rOD ⬘ ⫽rOB ⫹rBD ⬘ ⫽eI⫹w x i⫹w y j⫹z̄k,
where I, J, K and i, j, k are the unit vector sets for spindle and
drill frames, respectively. The velocity of D ⬘ can then be written
as
vD ⬘ ⫽ṙOD ⬘ ⫹ ␻⫻rOD ⬘ ⫽ v x i⫹ v y j⫹ v z k,
where dot denotes the time derivative and ␻ is the rotational
vector affecting the drill.
The choice of the rotational vector is critical for correctly de-
scribing the dynamic behavior of the drill. In parallel to the fixed-
free assumption, the drill is considered to be guided by the ma-
chining forces at its free end. Therefore, it can be assumed that the
rotational velocity that affects the drill is about the spindle axis
with an amplitude equal to the spindle speed, i.e., ␻⫽⍀K. This
assumption is valid so long as the runout at the drill tip is consid-
erably smaller that the drill diameter, and thus the drill removes
the workpiece material under the spindle axis, which is the case
here as can be seen from the hole profiles in Part 2. This is a
particular point that the derivation here diverges from that with
the assumption of fixed-pinned end conditions, in which case the
drill will also have a rotational velocity about its own axis at each
axial location. Thus, the velocity components become
v x ⫽ẇ x ⫹⍀ cos ␣ 共 e sin ␾ ⫺w y 兲 ,
v y ⫽ẇ y ⫹⍀w x cos ␣ ⫹⍀ 共 z̄ sin ␣ ⫹e cos ␾ 兲 ,
v z ⫽⍀ sin ␣ 共 e sin ␾ ⫺w y 兲 .
The Extended Hamilton’s Principle can be expressed as
冕 t1
t2
共 ␦ T⫺ ␦ V⫹ ␦ W nc 兲 dt⫽0, ␦ w x ⫽ ␦ w y ⫽0
where t 1 is the initial time, t 2 is the final time, ␦ W nc is the work
done by nonconservative forces, T is the kinetic energy, and V is
the potential energy. With the aforementioned assumptions, these
quantities can be written as
冕
1 L
T⫽ m vD ⬘ •vD ⬘ dz̄,
2 0
V⫽
1
2
EI 冕0
L
关共 w ⬙x 兲 2 ⫹ 共 w ⬙y 兲 2 兴 dz̄⫹
1
2 冕0
L
F z 关共 w ⬘x 兲 2 ⫹ 共 w ⬘y 兲 2 兴 dz̄,
␦ W nc ⫽ 冕 0
L
共 F x ␦ w x ⫹F y ␦ w y ⫹F dx ␦ w x ⫹F dy ␦ w y 兲 dz̄,
where prime denotes the derivative with respect to z̄. Here m is
the mass per unit length and F x , F y , and F z are applied forces
per unit length in x̄, ȳ, and z̄ directions, respectively. These forces
are considered to be continuous over the entire domain by ex-
pressing them in the form of spatial Dirac’s Delta function. F dx
⫽⫺c x ẇ x , F dy ⫽⫺c y ẇ y are the viscous damping forces. We will
assume a constant viscous damping coefficient c⫽c x ⫽c y .
8 Õ Vol. 125, FEBRUARY 2003
Following the derivation given in 关21兴 for this particular case,
the boundary value problem becomes
mẅ x ⫹cẇ x ⫺m⍀ 2 cos2 ␣ w x ⫺2m⍀ cos ␣ ẇ y ⫹EIw x⬙⬙
⳵
⫺ 共 F w ⬘ 兲 ⫽m⍀ 2 cos ␣ 共 e cos ␾ ⫹z̄ sin ␣ 兲 ⫹F x , (2)
⳵ z̄ z x
⳵
mẅ y ⫹cẇ y ⫺m⍀ 2 w y ⫹2m⍀ cos ␣ ẇ x ⫹EIw ⬙⬙
y ⫺ 共F w⬘兲
⳵ z̄ z y
⫽⫺m⍀ 2 e sin ␾ ⫹F y . (3)
The associated boundary conditions can be expressed as
w x ⫽0, w y ⫽0, w x⬘ ⫽0, w ⬘y ⫽0 at z̄⫽0
(4)
w ⬙x ⫽0, w ⬙y ⫽0, F z w ⬘x ⫽EIw ⵮
x , F z w ⬘y ⫽EIw ⵮ at z̄⫽L
y
The forces F x , F y and F z are essential input to the drill deflec-
tion model outlined in Eqs. 共2兲–共4兲. As mentioned above, these
forces are determined through a coordinate transformation from
thrust and radial forces P, R x , and R y . These forces are calcu-
lated here using the mechanistic model developed by Chan-
drasekharan 关5兴. However, this mechanistic force model must be
modified to account for the alignment errors.
2.3 Enhanced Force Model. In the mechanistic model, the
cutting lips are divided into incremental elements and the chip
load at each element is calculated to obtain the elemental forces.
In the absence of alignment errors and the drill deflection, the chip
load experienced by each incremental element is the same. How-
ever, due to the presence of the net runout and the drill deflection
the chip load changes continuously along the cutting lip.
Figure 2 shows the locating angle ␥ associated with a drill
when it is inserted into the spindle. T 1 and T 2 are the positions of
the drill tip T at time t 1 and t 2 , respectively. S ⬘ is a point along
the spindle axis such that S ⬘ T 1 and S ⬘ T 2 are perpendicular to the
spindle axis. S ⬘ T 1 is equal to the static displacement of the tip of
the drill and is equal to q(z)⫽q s . Let the solid line in Fig. 2
represent one of the cutting lips and the dotted line represent the
other cutting lip. Because of the locating angle, the cutting lips do
not emanate radially outwards from the center of the spindle (S ⬘ )
and hence the chip load changes along the length of the cutting
lip.
Figure 3 is the top view of the drill and illustrates the orienta-
tion of the cutting edges with respect to the spindle axis. Here,
␤ ⫽⍀t where ⍀ is the angular speed in rad/sec and t is the elapsed
at t⫽t 1 ,t 2
time. Vector q⫽qs ⫹⌬q denotes the deflected position of the drill
tip (T d ) at time t with respect to S ⬘ , where qs is the static tip-
runout vector and ⌬q is the displacement vector that arises from
the vibration of the drill. The position of a point W at the cutting
lips, rw , at time t can be given as
rw ⫽q⫹L w iu ⫽qs ⫹⌬q⫹L w iu ,
where L w is the distance of point W along the cutting lips from T d
and is constrained by the radius 共R兲 of the drill (⫺R⭐L w ⭐R),
and iu is the unit vector along the cutting lips in Fig. 3. Writing
and
qs ⫽ 储 qs 储共 cos ␤ 共 t 兲 I⫹sin ␤ 共 t 兲 J兲 , ⌬q⫽X d 共 t 兲 I⫹Y d 共 t 兲 J
iu ⫽cos共 ␤ 共 t 兲 ⫺ ␥ 兲 I⫹sin共 ␤ 共 t 兲 ⫺ ␥ 兲 J.
The position vector rw can then be written as
(5)
rw ⫽ 关 q s cos ␤ 共 t 兲 ⫹X d 共 t 兲 ⫹L w cos共 ␤ 共 t 兲 ⫺ ␥ 兲兴 I
⫹ 关 q s sin ␤ 共 t 兲 ⫹Y d 共 t 兲 ⫹L w sin共 ␤ 共 t 兲 ⫺ ␥ 兲兴 J.
To find the chip thickness at this location, the surface obtained by
projecting the cutting lips on the x-y plane 共recall Fig. 1兲 is dis-
cretized in polar coordinates with r w and ␪ w which are determined
as
Transactions of the ASME

Fig. 3 Determination of the chip thickness along the cutting
edges
␪ w ⫽tan⫺1 冋 册
rw •J
rw •I
, r w ⫽ 储 rw 储 .
The chip thickness that will be experienced by this location of the
cutting lips can be expressed as
f r ⍀ 共 sin ␬ 兲共 t w ⫺t w0 兲
t c 共 ␪ w 共 t 兲 ,r w 共 t 兲兲 ⫽
2␲
where f r is the feed rate, ␬ is the half point angle, time t w is the
present time, and time t w0 is the last time a cutting edge encoun-
tered this position of the surface.
If dc is the elemental thickness, the elemental chip area is then
expressed as dA c ⫽t c dc. The elemental normal (dF n ) and friction
(dF f ) forces in the rake-face coordinate system are then deter-
mined as in 关5兴;
dF n ⫽K n dA c , dF f ⫽K f dA c ,
where K n and K f are the specific normal and frictional cutting
energies, respectively. The resultant thrust force 共P兲 and radial
force components (R x and R y ) in the global coordinate system can
be obtained as
冋册兺
P tance sensor and can be expressed as
Rx ⫽
lips
兺
elements
关 ␭ 兴关 K兴 dA c ,
Ry
where 关K兴 is a vector consisting of specific cutting energies and
关␭兴 is a transformation matrix, as defined in 关5兴, required to trans-
form the forces from the rake face coordinate system to the global
coordinate system 共i.e., the spindle frame兲.
3 Measurement of Alignment Errors
In order to validate the developed dynamic model, and to study
and assess the impact of alignment errors on the radial forces,
vibrations, and ultimately the hole profile, an accurate and precise
measurement of these errors must be obtained.
Figure 4 shows schematics of the setup used to measure the
alignment errors. As the drill rotates about the spindle axis z, a
point D, on the drill axis moves along a circle whose radius is
equal to the net runout (SD in Fig. 4共b兲兲, where S corresponds to
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
Fig. 4 Methodology used for measuring the alignment errors
a point along the spindle axis 共see Fig. 4共a兲兲. The circle L 2 is the
locus of a point Q, which is on the periphery of the drill and is
farthest away from S at Q 3 . Q 1 is the point of the intersection of
L 2 and a line parallel to x axis and emanating from the capaci-
tance sensor located at C 1 . The capacitance sensor measures the
gap ⌫ between the point on the drill and the sensor along the x
axis, which varies as the drill undergoes a whirling motion around
S. The orientation of the drill spindle assembly when ⌫ is a mini-
mum 共shown in Fig. 4共a兲兲 can be obtained by manually rotating
the drill and finding the minimum sensor reading. Once this ori-
entation is determined, the drill is traversed vertically downwards
along the z axis and ⌫ is recorded at regular intervals. The slope of
the profile of ⌫ is then equal to the axial tilt ␣. To obtain the drill
orientation angle ␾ and the linear offset e, a second capacitance
sensor is located at C 2 共Fig. 4共b兲兲. At Q⫽Q 1 , SQ 1 can be ex-
pressed as
, (6)
SQ 1 ⫽SD⫹DQ 1 ⫽ 冑共 x 21 ⫹y 21 兲 , (8)
where DQ is equal to the radius 共R兲 of the drill. The expression
for SD can be obtained using Eq. 共1兲 in terms of e and ␾ as
SD⫽ 冑共 e⫹m tan ␣ cos ␾ 兲 2 ⫹ 共 m tan ␣ sin ␾ 兲 2 , (9)
where m 共shown in Fig. 4共a兲兲 is the measured distance between
the base of the drill and the plane containing the sensors (x-y)
and ␣ is the axial tilt. At Q 2 , a similar expression can be obtained
for SQ, in terms of x 2 and y 2 . These two simultaneous equations
can be solved to obtain e and ␾.
The locating angle, ␥, is measured in the following manner. The
displacement behavior of the drill y(t), while rotating at an ex-
tremely low speed such as 60 rpm, is recorded using the capaci-
(7)
y 共 t 兲 ⫽A sin ⍀t, (10)
where A is amplitude of the displacement, ⍀ is the rotational
speed in rad/sec, and t is the elapsed time. Rotating at a low speed,
for all practical purposes, eliminates the dynamics of the drill and
the profile recorded is a reflection of the net runout at the point of
measurement. The runout observed by the sensor when the cutting
lips are colinear to the line (C 1 Q 1 in Fig. 4共b兲兲 is recorded as
y(t)⫽Y 1 . Substituting Y 1 in Eq. 共10兲, the time at which the cut-
ting lips are colinear to the line C 1 Q 1 can be found and hence the
angular position at which the value of the net runout is equal to Y 1
can be obtained. This angular position is the locating angle of the
drill.
It is important to note that every time a new drill is inserted into
the spindle the alignment errors associated with it will change and
hence have to be determined using the above procedure.
FEBRUARY 2003, Vol. 125 Õ 9
 Table 2 Comparison of the average vibrations of the drill at
sensor locations „a… and „b…

Sensor Location 共a兲 Sensor Location 共b兲

Experimental Experimental
共Predicted兲 共Predicted兲
Test P-to-V 共␮m兲 Percent Error P-to-V 共␮m兲 Percent Error
1 259.8 共270.0兲 3.92 231 共239兲 3.41
2 273.0 共280.1兲 2.26 258.4共266.2兲 2.94
3 313.1 共303.0兲 3.22 269.1共266.1兲 1.11
4 416.2 共425.6兲 2.16 403.0共391.1兲 3.12

chining forces can be considered as external forces, and the prin-

Fig. 5 Experimental setup to measure the vibrations of the
drill and the forces during drilling
4 Validation of Drill Dynamics
4.1 Experimental Setup and Alignment Error Measure-
ment. The setup used during the experiments to validate the
drill vibration model in the absence of external forces is shown in
Fig. 5. High speed steel drills that have a relatively longer shank
and a shorter flute length 共known as aircraft extension drills兲 with
9.525 mm in diameter were used for the experiments. Capacitance
sensors 共ASP-20-CTA Accumeasure sensors, range⫽2.2 mm兲
were used to measure the vibrations of the drill.
A 2 2 design with length-to-diameter ratio 共L/D兲 of the drill and
speed of rotation as the base variables was chosen. The alignment
errors 共␣, e and ␾兲 associated with these drills were measured
using the technique described earlier. The experimental conditions
including measured alignment errors associated with each of the
two drills are listed in Table 1.
Because of the inability of the capacitance sensors to accurately
measure the vibrations in the fluted region, vibrations of the drill
were measured at two other locations along the length of the drill
above the flutes, namely, at 共a兲 100 mm from the tip of the drill
and 共b兲 111 mm above the tip for the shorter drill and 116 mm
above the tip of the drill for the longer drill.
4.2 Validation Experiments. The system of equations de-
scribed by Eqs. 共2兲–共4兲 can be classified as an initial-boundary
value problem. Although the machining forces in these equations
are nonlinear functions of the displacements, when the nonlineari-
ties are weak, only the linear terms of a series expansion can be
taken into account without losing accuracy. In this way, the ma-
ciples of separation of variables and normal mode summation 共su-
perposition兲 can be applied. With this assumption, the solution of
the equation of motions can be determined by modal analysis in a
manner analogous to that described in 关21兴.
The eigenvalue problem derived from the boundary-value prob-
lem is first solved for its boundary condition and the resultant
time-dependent equations are converted to its state-space repre-
sentation. The ultimate time domain equations in state-space may
be solved using commercially available equation solvers like
ode45 from MatLab®. Thus, the vibrations of the drill at any axial
location can be found. Equations 共2兲–共4兲 were employed to pre-
dict the vibrations of the drill for the conditions listed in Table 1 at
the two sensor locations 共a兲 and 共b兲. The applied forces (F x , F y
and F z ) in Eqs. 共2兲–共3兲 were set to 0. The vibrations obtained
from the model were compared to that observed during the experi-
ments.
The peak-to-valley 共P-to-V兲 vibrations of the drill predicted
from the model as well as those obtained from the experiments
and averaged over ten revolutions were compared using the rela-
tive error defined as
兩 P i ⫺M i 兩
E i⫽ , (11)
兩 M i兩
where E i is the relative error at the ith measurement location, P i is
the average peak-to-valley vibration as predicted by the model,
and M i is the average peak-to-valley vibration as observed during
the experiments.
Table 2 lists the relative error between the observed and the
predicted peak-to-valley vibrations of the drill rotating at the con-
ditions of Table 1. Figure 6 shows a profile of the vibration of the
drill for Test 1. The observed and the predicted vibrations show
the spindle frequency to be the most dominant frequency. It is
seen that the model predicts the vibrations of a drill to within 5
percent of the observed vibrations.

Table 1 Experimental design for drill experiments

Test L/D Speed 共rpm兲 e (mm) ␾ 共deg兲 ␣ 共deg兲

1 21.33 1500 0.052 164.4 0.077
2 29.71 1500 0.044 21.2 0.029
3 21.33 4000 0.052 164.4 0.077
4 29.71 4000 0.044 21.2 0.029
Fig. 6 Vibrations of the drill: Test 1

10 Õ Vol. 125, FEBRUARY 2003 Transactions of the ASME

 Table 3 Experimental design for rod experiments Table 6 Comparison of the average radial forces and the av-
erage vibrations of the drill
Test L/D Speed 共rpm兲 e (mm) ␾ 共deg兲 ␣ 共deg兲
Radial Forces Drill Vibrations
1 17.33 1500 0.0065 163.0 0.016
2 27.6 1500 0.0117 7.73 0.0063 Experimental Experimental
3 17.33 4000 0.0065 163.0 0.016 Test 共Predicted兲 共Predicted兲
4 27.6 4000 0.0117 7.73 0.0063 Case P-to-V 共N兲 Percent Error P-to-V 共␮m兲 Percent Error
1 52.9 共54.8兲 3.64 97.2 共100.1兲 3.02
2 59.8 共56.2兲 6.02 81.8 共84.8兲 3.60
Table 4 Relative errors between the predicted and the mea- 3 73.7 共71.1兲 3.56 86.7 共88.9兲 2.46
sured vibrations of a rotating rod in percent 4 74.5 共72.9兲 2.12 64.9 共63.9兲 1.66
5 42.8 共43.5兲 1.55 61.1 共60.0兲 1.84
Relative errors in percent 6 43.5 共41.5兲 4.59 36.6 共33.9兲 4.69
Test
Sensor
position 1 2 3 4
Tip 1.62 3.45 0.60 2.01 For all the above six cases, radial forces, thrust forces, and the
0.92L 3.89 2.66 0.92 1.41 vibrations of the drill were measured and the signals were condi-
0.84L 2.94 1.61 1.59 2.32
0.77L 4.44 3.01 1.44 3.10 tioned using a low pass filter.
0.69L 4.05 2.12 1.86 0.07 The force model, enhanced with the inclusion of the alignment
errors, was used to predict the forces associated with drilling. The
algorithm described in the previous section was used to predict the
vibrations of the drill. The measured peak-to-valley radial forces
and vibrations were averaged over ten revolutions and are listed in
To demonstrate that the model can be used to accurately predict Table 6 along with those predicted by the model for these tests. It
the vibrations at the drill tip and along its entire length, experi- is seen that the model predicts the radial forces and the vibrations
ments were carried out with precision AISI 1516 steel rods with of the drill to within 6 percent to that observed during the experi-
9.525 mm diameter. ments.
Table 3 provides the experimental conditions for the rod experi- Figure 7 compares the experimental results and the model pre-
ments and the alignment errors associated with these rods when dictions for the x-component of the radial force experienced dur-
held in the spindle. Vibrations of the rods were measured at five ing Test 1 while drilling. The model predicts the radial force in
different locations, namely, at the tip of the rod 共L兲, 0.92L, 0.84L, close agreement to that observed during the experiments. It can
0.77L and 0.69L, where L is the length of the rod. These corre- also be seen that the spindle frequency is the most dominant fre-
spond to locations that would be in the fluted region of the drill. quency, which indicates the dominance of alignment errors on the
The model was used to predict the vibrations of the rod under the radial forces. Similar observations can be made from Fig. 8,
conditions of Table 3. The relative errors for all the cases were which compares the vibrations of the drill for Test 1.
calculated and are shown in Table 4.
It can be seen that in all cases, the relative error is within 5
percent, thereby suggesting that the model accurately predicts the
dynamics at the tip of the rod and at locations along the entire
length of the rod.

5 Model Validation During Drilling

A special setup shown in Fig. 5 was designed to measure the
vibrations of the drill during drilling. This setup enables the ca-
pacitance sensors to be fed with the drill. A three-axis Kistler
platform dynamometer 共type 9255A兲 was used to collect the thrust
and the radial forces during drilling. High speed steel aircraft
extension drills with 9.525 mm diameter were used to drill the
cast aluminum alloy 356-T6. For all the experiments the vibra-
tions of the drill were measured at 103 mm above the tip of the
drill, which is just above the end of the fluted region.
Six experiments were run to validate the model over two levels Fig. 7 x -component of the radial force: Test 1
of speed, feed, and alignment errors. The conditions of the experi-
ments and the measured alignment errors associated with them are
listed in Table 5.

Table 5 Experimental conditions and the associated align-

ment errors during drilling

Speed Feed e ␾ ␣ ␥
Test 共rpm兲 共mm/rev兲 L/D 共mm兲 共deg兲 共deg兲 共deg兲
1 1500 0.150 20.0 0.014 151.8 0.046 5
2 2500 0.150 20.0 0.014 151.8 0.046 5
3 1500 0.225 20.0 0.014 151.8 0.046 5
4 2500 0.225 20.0 0.014 151.8 0.046 5
5 1500 0.150 22.66 0.024 172.9 0.026 11
6 2500 0.150 22.66 0.024 172.9 0.026 11
Fig. 8 Vibrations of the drill: Test 1

Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering FEBRUARY 2003, Vol. 125 Õ 11

 Table 7 Levels of the variables used for the effect analysis
Variable Low High
Axial Tilt 共␣ in deg兲 0.026 0.046
Drill Orientation Angle 共␾ in deg兲 15 165
Locating Angle 共␥ in deg兲 10 80
Speed 共rpm兲 1500 2500
Feed 共mm/rev兲 0.15 0.25
6 Effect of the Alignment Errors on Radial Forces and
Drill Vibrations
The results obtained from the validation experiments show that
the drilling forces and the drill vibrations depend strongly on the
alignment errors. Comparison of the pairs of test 共1 and 5兲 and 共2
and 6兲 in Table 6, which have the same speed of rotation and
similar drill length, but different alignment errors, shows large
differences in radial forces and drill vibrations.
To more clearly reveal the effects of the alignment errors on
forces and vibrations, the alignment errors, spindle speed, and
feed rate were varied in a 2 5 factorial design scheme. The levels
of these variables are listed in Table 7. The enhanced drill dynam-
ics and the cutting force models were used to predict the radial
forces and the drill vibrations for each test. It was found that the
axial tilt 共␣兲, drill orientation angle 共␾兲, and the feed rate signifi-
cantly affect the vibrations of the drill and the radial forces.
An increase in the axial tilt increases the net runout at the tip of
the drill and hence increases the variation of radial forces 共i.e.,
peak-to-valley兲 and associated drill vibrations. An increase in the
feed rate causes the chip area and thus the radial forces and the
drill vibrations to increase. An increase in the drill orientation
angle 共␾兲 reduces the net runout at the drill tip 共recall Fig. 1 and
Eq. 共1兲兲 and hence reduces the radial forces and the associated
drill vibrations.
To understand the exact nature of the variation of the net runout
with change in ␾, the net runout at the drill tip 共when ␣⫽⫹0.026
deg, e⫽0.024 mm, and ␾⫽152 deg兲 was found for several values
of ␾ and is plotted in Fig. 9. The levels chosen for ␾ in Fig. 9 span
the entire range within which it varies 共0 deg to 180 deg兲 and
clearly demonstrate how as ␾ increases, the net runout actually
decreases through the reduction in the influence of the linear off-
set for a given value of the axial tilt 共recall Fig. 1 and the descrip-
tion of the net runout兲.
To show the extent of the effect of the axial tilt 共␣兲 and the drill
orientation angle 共␾兲 on the radial forces and the drill vibrations,
the dynamic deflection model and the enhanced cutting force
model were used to predict the drill vibrations and the radial
forces at various levels of ␣ and ␾. Six levels of ␣ from 0 deg to
0.056 deg 共0 deg, 0.016 deg, 0.026 deg, 0.036 deg, 0.046 deg, and
0.056 deg兲 were chosen. ␾ was varied over the levels 0 deg, 37
deg, 74 deg, 111 deg, 148 deg, and 180 deg. For all these cases,
the locating angle 共␥⫽10 deg兲, linear offset (e⫽0.024 mm), and
Fig. 9 Variation of the net runout with varying ␾
12 Õ Vol. 125, FEBRUARY 2003
Fig. 10 Effects of ␣ and ␾ on „a… P -to-V radial forces and „b…
drill vibrations
drill projection length 共216 mm兲 were kept constant. The spindle
was rotated at 2500 rpm and the drill was fed at 0.25 mm/rev.
Figures 10共a兲 and 共b兲 show the family of curves that represent
the radial forces and the drill vibrations versus the drill orientation
angle 共␾兲 obtained for various levels of the axial tilt 共␣兲. For a
particular drill orientation, as the axial tilt increases from 0.016
deg to 0.056 deg, on an average, radial forces increase by 70
percent and the drill vibrations increase by 115 percent. It is clear
from Figs. 10共a兲 and 共b兲 that the effects of ␣ and ␾ are both
significant but act independently of each other, i.e., there is no
interaction effect. Furthermore, as ␾ changes from 0 deg to 180
deg radial forces and vibrations decrease by about 40 percent.
Clearly, as expected, the most favorable situation arises when ␣ is
the smallest and ␾⫽180 deg. For ␣⫽0 deg the effect of ␾ goes to
0.
7 Summary and Conclusions
A dynamic drilling model that incorporates the effect of the
alignment errors associated with the location of the drill in the
spindle has been developed. These errors include the drill linear
offset 共e兲, the axial tilt angle 共␣兲, the drill orientation angle 共␾兲,
and the locating angle 共␥兲 of the cutting lips. The mechanistic
force model developed in 关5兴 has been enhanced to incorporate the
effect of these alignment errors. In particular, the chip load calcu-
lation has been modified to take into account the vibrations of the
drill in the presence of the aforementioned alignment errors.
The following conclusions are drawn from this work:
1. Model validation experiments have demonstrated the ability
of the model to predict the radial forces and the drill vibrations
within 6 percent of those observed during the experiments.
2. The radial forces and the associated drill vibrations increase
with an increase in the axial tilt and decreases with an increase in
the drill orientation angle. The most favorable situation occurs
when the drill is held in the spindle such that the axial tilt is at a
minimum.
3. The change in locating angle 共␥兲 has no appreciable effect
on the resultant radial forces and the drill vibrations.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the National
Science Foundation Grant DMI 98-13457. The authors also thank
Professor K. F. Ehmann of Northwestern University for providing
instrumentation necessary to measure the alignment errors and the
drill vibrations.
References
关1兴 Watson, A. R., 1985, ‘‘Drilling Model for Cutting Lip and Chisel Edge and
Comparison of Experimental and Predicted Results. I-Initial Cutting Lip
Model,’’ Int. J. Mach. Tool Des. Res., 25共4兲, pp. 347–365.
关2兴 Watson, A. R., 1985, ‘‘Drilling Model for Cutting Lip and Chisel Edge and
Comparison of Experimental and Predicted Results. II-Revised Cutting Lip
Model,’’ Int. J. Mach. Tool Des. Res., 25共4兲, pp. 367–376.
关3兴 Watson, A. R., 1985, ‘‘Drilling Model for Cutting Lip and Chisel Edge and
Comparison of Experimental and Predicted Results. III-Drilling Model for
Chisel Edge,’’ Int. J. Mach. Tool Des. Res., 25共4兲, pp. 377–392.
Transactions of the ASME
 关4兴 Watson, A. R., 1985, ‘‘Drilling Model for Cutting Lip and Chisel Edge and
Comparison of Experimental and Predicted Results. IV-Drilling Tests to De-
termine Chisel Edge Contribution to Torque and Thrust,’’ Int. J. Mach. Tool
Des. Res., 25共4兲, pp. 393– 404.
关5兴 Chandrasekharan, V., Kapoor, S. G., and DeVor, R. E., 1998, ‘‘A Mechanistic
Model to Predict the Cutting Force System for Arbitrary Drill Point Geom-
etry,’’ ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 120共3兲, pp. 563–570.
关6兴 Sriram, R., 1996, ‘‘An Investigation of the Effect of Radial Forces in Drill-
ing,’’ Master’s thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-
Illinois.
关7兴 Fujii, H., Marui, E., and Ema, S., 1986, ‘‘Whirling Vibration in Drilling. Part
1: Cause of Vibration and Role of Chisel Edge,’’ ASME J. Ind., 108, pp.
157–162.
关8兴 Fujii, H., Marui, E., and Ema, S., 1986, ‘‘Whirling Vibration in Drilling. part
2: Influence of Drill Geometries, Particularly of the Drill Flank, on the Initia-
tion of Vibration,’’ ASME J. Ind., 108, pp. 163–168.
关9兴 Fujii, H., Marui, E., and Ema, S., 1988, ‘‘Whirling Vibration in Drilling. Part
3: Vibration Analysis in Drilling Workpiece With a Pilot Hole,’’ ASME J. Ind.,
110, pp. 315–321.
关10兴 Lin, C., Jalisi, M. N., and Ehmann, K. F., 1991, ‘‘Modeling and Experimental
Analysis of Margin Forces in Micro-Drilling,’’ ASME Manufacturing Pro-
cesses and Materials Challenges in Microelectronic Packaging, AMD-Vol.
131/EEP-Vol. 1, pp. 25–33.
关11兴 Chen, W. R., and Keer, L. M., 1993, ‘‘Transverse Vibrations of a Rotating
Twisted Timoshenko Beam Under Axial Loading,’’ ASME J. Vibr. Acoust.,
115, pp. 285–294.
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
关12兴 Tekinalp, O., and Ulsoy, A. G., 1989, ‘‘Modeling and Finite Element Analysis
of Drill Bit Vibrations,’’ ASME J. Vibr. Acoust., Stress, Reliab. Des. 111, pp.
148 –155.
关13兴 Rincon, D. M., and Ulsoy, A. G., 1995, ‘‘Complex Geometry, Rotary Inertia
and Gyroscopic Effects on Drill Vibrations,’’ J. Sound Vib., 188, pp. 701–715.
关14兴 Lee, C. W., Katz, R., Ulsoy, A. G., and Scott, R. A., 1988, ‘‘Modal Analysis of
Distributed Parameter Rotating Shaft,’’ J. Sound Vib., 122, pp. 119–130.
关15兴 Rincon, D. M., and Ulsoy, A. G., 1995, ‘‘Complex Geometry, Rotary Inertia,
and Gyroscopic Moment Effects on Drill Vibrations,’’ J. Sound Vib., 188共5兲,
pp. 701–715.
关16兴 Ulsoy, A. G., and Tekinalp, O., 1984, ‘‘Dynamic Modeling of Transverse Drill
Bit Vibrations,’’ CIRP Ann., 33共1兲, pp. 253–258.
关17兴 Choi, S. H., Pierre, C., and Ulsoy, A. G., 1992, ‘‘Consistent Modeling of
Rotating Timoshenko Shafts Subject to Axial Loads,’’ ASME J. Vibr. Acoust.,
114, pp. 249–259.
关18兴 Lee, S. J., Eman, K. F., and Wu, S. M., 1987, ‘‘An Analysis of the Drill
Wandering Motion,’’ ASME J. Eng. Ind., 109, pp. 297–305.
关19兴 Chiou, R. Y., and Wu, K., 1998, ‘‘Analysis of the Runout Effecton Hole Qual-
ity in Drilling,’’ Proceedings of the ASME Manufacturing Science and Engi-
neering Division, pp. 651– 658.
关20兴 Surendran, V., 1998, ‘‘A Study of Hole Quality in Drilling,’’ Master’s thesis,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Illinois.
关21兴 Meirovitch, L., 1997, Principles and Techniques of Vibrations, Prentice-Hall,
Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458.
FEBRUARY 2003, Vol. 125 Õ 13