1

Abstract
An experiment was performed where a group of students were tasked with a laboratory experiment to
investigate the effects of cutting tools rake angles changes upon specific energy, shear angle and friction
angle. After the investigation they were tasked to compare the results with the merchant’s theory. The
objectives of experiment in this report is were:

• Evaluate the effects of cutting’s tool rakes angle upon specific cutting energy, shear angle and
friction angle and cutting forces.
• Compare the practical results with the Merchant’s relation.
• Analyse the tool after performing the metal cutting then give comments on its life.

The critical research questions asked in this report is: How do changes in the cutting tools rake angle affect
the specific cutting energy, shear angle and friction angle?

The instruments that were used in this report so that the objectives that are going to help with answering
the objective question are listed below:

A lathe, hollow–bar work part, two–component cutting–force dynamometer, recording equipment, three
High-Speed-Steel (HSS) cutting tools with various rake angles, and various metrology measuring
equipment.

After the results were analysed and discussed carefully conclusions were then made. The conclusions stated
in this report are:

• The rake angle increases with decreasing specific cutting energy. This conclusion agrees with the
merchant’s theory as observed in the discussion.
• The rake angle increases with decreasing cutting forces, this also agrees with the merchant’s theory.
• The rake angle increases with decreasing friction angle. Although it wasn’t proven in this
experiment the theory remain true as human errors are always while conducting an experiment.
• The rake angle increases with increasing shear angle. This was also not proven, reasons were given
in the discussion section. Maybe some of the assumptions were violated.
• As the rake angle increases so is the life of the tool.
• The merchant’s theory holds true if its assumptions are not violated and if the precautions and the
procedure is followed correctly.
2

Contents
Abstract....................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 5
1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Motivation......................................................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Research Question ............................................................................................................................ 5
1.3 Objectives ......................................................................................................................................... 5
2.Literature Review .................................................................................................................................... 6
The forces acting on the chip in the Orthogonal cutting .................................................................... 6
2.1 Description of previous theoretical and experimental approaches ..................................................... 7
3.Research Method ..................................................................................................................................... 8
3.1 Instrumentation/Apparatus ................................................................................................................ 8
3.2 Procedure and Precautions ................................................................................................................ 8
3.2.1 Procedure ................................................................................................................................... 8
3.2.1 Precautions ................................................................................................................................. 9
4. Data and Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1Data/ Observations ............................................................................................................................. 9
4.2 Data Processing ............................................................................................................................. 10
4.3 Results .......................................................................................................................................... 12
5. Discussion ............................................................................................................................................. 14
5.2 Forces correlation with the Rake angle ........................................................................................... 14
6. Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 16
References ................................................................................................................................................ 17
Appendix A: Forces Equations and The Merchants Circle ....................................................................... 18
Appendix B: The remaining graphs of forces vs rake angles .................................................................... 19
Appendix C: images of the Apparatus ...................................................................................................... 20
Appendix D: Images of a build-up in the cutting tools ............................................................................. 20
3

List of Figures

Figure 1: Shows the two methods of Metal Cutting .................................................................................... 6

Figure 2: An illustration of a lathe Machine ............................................................................................... 8
Figure 3: voltage data of 30 degrees ......................................................................................................... 10
Figure 6:load cell calbration to get the thrust force and the cutting force ................................................. 11
Figure 7: processed data of the forces and other quantities ....................................................................... 11
Figure 8:Average Thrusting force ............................................................................................................. 12
Figure 9:Average cutting force ................................................................................................................. 12
Figure 10:specific cutting energy vs rake angle ........................................................................................ 13
Figure 11: Friction angle ........................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 12: the difference of friction angle and rake angle vs shear angle ................................................. 13
Figure 13:shear angle vs rake angle .......................................................................................................... 14
Figure 14:Merchants Circle ...................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 15: remaining graphs of forces against rake angle ......................................................................... 19
Figure 16: Apparatus used in the experiment ............................................................................................ 20
Figure 17: Microscope image for rake angle 10° ...................................................................................... 20
Figure 18: Microscope image for rake angle 20° ...................................................................................... 20
Figure 19:Microscope image for rake angle 30° ....................................................................................... 20
Figure 5: voltage raw data of 10 degrees rake angle ................................................................................. 20
Figure 4: voltage raw data of 20 degrees .................................................................................................. 21
4

List of Tables

Nomenclature
µ Coefficient of friction
ϕ Shear angle Degrees

𝛂 Rake angle Degrees

𝞫 Friction angle or beta Degrees

𝐹 Frictional Force Newtons

𝐹𝑠 Shear Force Newtons

𝐹𝑛 The force Normal to the shear plane Newtons

𝑁 The force Normal to the chip Newtons

𝑃𝐶 Cutting Power N-m/s

𝑅𝑀𝑅 Material Removal Rate mm^3/s

𝑣 Cutting speed m/s

𝑓 Feed mm

𝑑 Depth of cut mm

𝑈 Specific cutting energy N-m/mm^3

𝐹𝑡 Thrusting Force Newtons

𝐹𝑐 Cutting force Newtons

𝑅 Resultant force Newtons

ѡ angular velocity rad/s

5

1.Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Motivation
This experiment is important because proper training and education is important to obtain optimum
productivity. To make production decisions to get optimum production of a component through metal
cutting one needs to understand tool consumption and metal cutting. By understanding metaling cutting,
accurate prediction will be made, and proper tools may be selected for production. The tool consumption
has a vast economic implication in the industry. An optimum productivity could be achieved only through
proper cutting tools, cutting data and in depth understanding of what happens at the metal cutting stage [5].
Students will be learning about what happens at the metal cutting stage. Students are to acquire knowledge
on proper cutting tools, fixtures and cutting data and understand the effects of machining parameters upon
machining of metals. After developing an understanding of the cutting tools and cutting parameters, through
these skills, they will be able to make future production quality decisions. Specifically, what they will be
learning is the effects of cutting- tool’s rank angles changes upon specific cutting energy, shear angle and
friction angle, then they will compare the practical results with the merchant’s theory.

1.4 Research Question

How do changes in the cutting tools rake angle affect the specific cutting energy, shear angle and friction
angle?

1.3 Objectives
• Evaluate the effects of cutting’s tool rakes angle upon specific cutting energy, shear angle and
friction angle and cutting forces.
• Compare the practical results with the Merchant’s relation.
• Analyse the tool after performing the metal cutting then give comments on its life.
6

2.Literature Review
The theory of metal states that “The process of metal removal, a process in which a wedge- shaped tool
engages a workpiece to remove a layer of material in the form of a chip, goes back many years” [1]. There
are two basic methods of metal cutting based on cutting edge and direction of relative motion between tool
and work which are also the focus in the MECN3025 course.

The two basic methods are Orthogonal cutting process (Two Dimensional) and Oblique cutting process
(Three Dimensional). “In orthogonal cutting process, the cutting edge is perpendicular (90 degree) to the
direction of feed. The chip flows in a direction normal to cutting edge of the tool. A perfectly sharp tool
will cut the metal on rack surface.” [2]. There are only two forces acting on the workpiece, which are namely
the cutting force and the thrust force. This basic method is considered as the two-dimensional cutting.” In
oblique cutting process, the cutting edge is inclined at an acute angle (less than 90 degree) to the direction
of feed. The chip flows sideway in a long curl. The chip flows in a direction at an angle with normal to the
cutting edge of the tool.” [2]. In an oblique cutting process three forces are acting. The forces are the cutting
force, radial force and the thrust force or the feed force. This type of process is a three-dimensional cutting.
“The cutting edge being oblique, the shear force acts on a large area which then increases the tool life.”
This report focuses mainly on the Orthogonal cutting process as the are only two forces involved.

Figure 1: Shows the two methods of Metal Cutting

The forces acting on the chip in the Orthogonal cutting

There are four forces acting on the chip in the orthogonal cutting process. The forces are the shear force,
normal force to shear plane, frictional force and Normal force to the chip.

• 𝐹𝑠 = The Shear Force. This force acts along the shear plane it is the resistance to the shear of the
metal informing the chip.
• 𝐹𝑛 = The is the normal force that acts normal to the shear plane.” It is the backing force of the chip
provided by the workpiece” [2].
• 𝐹 = “this is the frictional resistance of the tool acting against the motion of the chip as it moves
upwards along the tool” [2].
• 𝑁= The Normal force that is normal to the chip. The normal force is the force that is provided by
the chip.

Vector summation of forces 𝐹 and 𝑁 gives the resultant 𝑅 while vector summation of 𝐹𝑠 and 𝐹𝑛 gives the
resultant 𝑅 ′ [3].” It is assumed that the resultant forces 𝑅 and 𝑅 ′ are equal and opposite in magnitude and
7

direction. Also, they are collinear. Therefore, for the purpose of analysis the chip is regarded as an
independent body held in mechanical equilibrium by the action of two equal and opposite forces 𝑅 ,which
the workpiece exerts upon the chip and 𝑅 ′ which the tool exerts upon the chip.”[1]. The forces that act on
the tool are two components of 𝑅 which are 𝐹𝑐 and 𝐹𝑡 . These forces can be determined using a
dynamometer.” Equations can be derived to relate the forces that cannot be measured to the forces that can
be measured.” [1]. The equations are derived using the triangles from the merchant’s model. The equations
and the Merchants Circle can be found in Appendix A. Based on the calculated forces using equations from
Appendix A, the coefficient of friction can be calculated using the equation 1 below.

𝐹
µ=tan(𝞫) = (1)
𝑁

“Where µ is the coefficient of friction and 𝞫 is the friction angle and F is the frictional force and N is the
Normal force. Merchant proposed a theoretical relationship for predicting the shear angle in orthogonal
cutting” [5]. The assumptions around the theoretical assumptions are:

• “The chip behaves as a rigid body, held in equilibrium by the forces transmitted across the tool-
chip interface and the shear angle” [5]
• “the resultant tool force is transmitted across the tool chip interface, and no force acts along the
tool edge or flank.” [5]
• “the shear angle will take a value that minimizes the work done in cutting.” [5]

Equation 2 is the mathematical equation that demonstrates the theoretical relationship for predicting the
shear angle.

𝜶 𝞫
𝜙 = 45° + − (2)
𝟐 𝟐

Where ϕ is the shear plane angle, 𝛂 is the tool’s rake angle and 𝞫 is the friction angle. The cutting parameters
are the speed, feed and the depth of cut.” The cutting speed is the distance travelled by the work surface in
unit time with reference to the cutting edge of the tool. The feed is the distance advanced by the tool into
or along the workpiece each time the tool point passes a certain position in its travel over the surface. The
depth of cut is the distance through which the cutting tool is plunged into the workpiece surface.” [1].

2.1 Description of previous theoretical and experimental approaches

The experiment to be discussed aims to examine main cutting forces and surface roughness on cutting
parameters. Main cutting forces acting on cutting tool depending on cutting parameters when machining
AISI 1117 steel were examined experimentally [4]. Experimental results obtained were compared with
empirical results. “The conclusions that were discovered were that the most suitable cutting speed for 1mm
8

and 2mm depth of cuts were found as 100m/mm and 75m/mm respectively in terms of cutting forces. It
was observed that the highest cutting forces were obtained at lower cutting speeds. It was also observed
that cutting forces increased with feed rate” [4].

3.Research Method
3.1 Instrumentation/Apparatus

The merchant metal cutting experiment was orchestrated on a lathe, where a Mecaval 174M hallow bar
with various properties was arranged onto it. The three high speed steel cutting tools of 3 different rake
angle were also used to cut the hollow bar work part. The three different rake angles are 10°, 20° and 30°.
A two-component cutting force dynamometer was used to record the time and voltages in millivolts so that
the cutting force and the thrust force maybe computed. The results were then sent to recording equipment
which is a computer. A memory stick was also used to send the data to students. Various metrology
measuring equipment were also used to measure the dimensions of the chip. One other measuring
equipment that was used is a Vernier caliper. This tool was used to measure the length and the width of the
chips after being cut by the three high speed steel tools. A bench micrometer was utilized to measure the
thickness of the three chips that were cut. A microscope was used to observe on the three speed steel cutting
tools after they were used. The purpose of the observation was to check the accumulation of the chip on the
tools. This would help makes conclusions on the tool life. To measure the mass of the chips after being cut
a digital scale was used. Figure 2 below shows an arrangement of the lathe that was used in the experiment.

Figure 2: An illustration of a lathe Machine

3.2 Procedure and Precautions

3.2.1 Procedure
In the beginning of the experiment, the lathe machine was positioned at the speed of 124 revolutions per
minute and at a feed of 0.0042 inch per revolutions. The cutting depth in the lathe machine was set to 4mm.
After the initial setup the procedure below was followed:

1. A Mecaval 174M hallow bar piece of diameter 76.2 mm was positioned in the lathe machine.
2. A hex key was then used to slacken a component on the lathe machine
3. A 30° high speed cutting tool was positioned in the vice.
4. The tool was then fastened securely in position.
5. The tool was then moved towards the hollow bar with a constant speed and feed.
9

6. A program that measured voltages in millivolts was started, then calibration data was provided to
convert them to forces.
7. After the chip formation was complete the tool was removed.
8. The chip and the tool that was used to cut it were then placed together in one position.
9. Steps 2 to 8 was repeated for tools with rake angle 10° and 20°.
10. 3 small cut pieces were then moved to the lab take their dimensions and inspect them.
11. A bench micrometer was then used in the lab to measure the thickness of each chip. Three chip
thickness measurements were taken for each chip and then they were averaged.
12. A Vernier caliper was used to measure the lengths of each chip that was cut into a specific length
of about 20mm.
13. A Vernier caliper was also used to measure the width of the chips. Three width measurements of
the respective chips were taken then an average was calculated.
14. To measure the mass of each chip a digital scale was used.
15. To inspect the build-up on the tools a microscope was used to inspect the sharpened side of the
tools respectively.

3.2.1 Precautions
A risk assessment for this experiment is in Appendix C. The persuasions below are the ones that were
implemented in the metal cutting experiment.

• Protective equipment was worn in this experiment. Equipment such as safety glasses to protect eyes
from being damaged from the thin strip cuts off the hollow bar.
• Before utilizing the metrology measuring equipment such as the bench micrometer, digital scale
and the Vernier caliper, they were adjusted to zero.
• To avoid imprecisions and to get the rake angle wanted, it was made certain that the speed steel
cutting tools were fastened securely in position.
• To make sure data was accurate, the same value of feed was used throughout the experiment.
• Before making physical contact with the chip, ensure that its temperature has settled down.

4. Data and Analysis

4.1Data/ Observations
The hollow bar was mounted to the lathe. A procedure mentioned in the procedure section was then
followed. With every chip cut data was sent to the computer as millivolts and time. Figure 3 shows the
readings of millivolts that were taken against time for a 30 degrees rake angle. The remaining graphs for
other rake angles are in Appendix E. The average voltages were then taken so that the forces could be
10

calculated. Table 2 shows the raw data of the average voltages with their respective rake angles. The chips
were then sent to the lab for inspection. The metrology equipment was then used to measure the respective
dimensions of the cut chip. Then an average of certain measurements was taken. Table 1 shows the various
dimensions of every chips that was cut by a specific rake angle. While measuring the mass of the chips it
was necessary to not talk or cause any motion towards the digital scale as it is extremely sensitive and
incorrect data could’ve been taken

Afterwards the cutting tools were then observed in the microscope. The aim of this was to check the build
up on every tool. It was then seen that the tool with the least rake angle which is 10 degrees had a build-up.
The build up decreased with increasing rake angle. Proving that with tools with high rake angle have a
longer tool life that the ones with less rake angle.

Table 1:Rake angle and chip dimensions

Rake Chip Chip Chip Mass

angle thickness length breadth
𝛼°
1st 2nd 3rd avera 1st 2nd 3rd Avera
measure measure measure ge measur measure measur ge
ment ment ment ement ment ement
10 17.8 17 13.3 16.03 29.52 4.13 4.19 4.10 4.14 0.12
20 22.7 23.4 23.4 23.2 24.67 4.33 4.31 4.27 4.30 0.18
30 26.8 25.7 23.6 25.37 28.58 4.16 4.10 4.09 4.12 0.20

1000
500
0
71
15
22
29
36
43
50
57
64

78
85
92
99

134
1
8

106
113
120
127

141
148
155
162
169
176
183
190
197
204
211
218
225
232
239
246
253
260
channel A value Channel C Value

Figure 3: voltage data of 30 degrees

Table 2: average voltages vs rake angles

Average Rake angles

voltages 𝛼°
10 20 30
Channel A 630.92 473.07 266
Channel C 400.09 388.69 271.40

4.2 Data Processing

From the results obtained in Table 2, the average voltages from channel A and Channel C were converted
to volts by dividing them by a 1000 as they were provided in millivolts instead of volts. For each rake angle,
11

the load cell calibration curves in Figure 6 were used to find the average cutting force and the average
thrusting force. The voltages in channel A were used to calculate average cutting force using the equation
provided in the figure 6 for F(z). The average converted voltages in channel C were used to calculate
average thrusting force for a respective rake angle by substituting the Average voltage in the equation for
F(x) given below in figure 6. This was done for every rake angle. The theorem of Pythagoras was then used
to calculate the resultant force for every respective rake angle. The normal force was the calculated using
equation 4 provided in Appendix A. The friction force was then calculated by substituting the average
cutting forces and the average thrusting forces with their respective rake angle using equation 3 in the
Appendix A. This calculation was done for every rake angle. The normal force and the friction force were
then used to calculate the friction angle for each rake angle using equation 1. The shear angle was then
calculated using equation 2 by substituting a specific rake angle and its respective friction angle. This was
done for all three rake angles. The difference between a friction angle and its matching rake angle was
calculated for every rake angle. A cutting speed of 124 rpm was set in the lathe, to convert it equation 8
was used where r is the diameter(76.2mm) that was given divided by two. The feed was also converted
from inches to mm. Then equation 7 was used to calculate the cutting energy by substituting the values.
This was done for all the rake angle. Figure 7 shows all the processed data after the calculations

𝑃𝐶 𝐹𝑐 𝑣
𝑈= = (7)
𝑅𝑀𝑅 𝑣𝑓𝑑

Where 𝑈 is the Specific cutting energy in N-m/mm^3 - 𝑃𝐶 is the Cutting Power in N-m/s - 𝑅𝑀𝑅 is the
Material Removal Rate in mm^3/s - 𝑣 is the Cutting speed in m/s - 𝑓 is the Feed in mm- 𝑑 is the Depth
of cut in mm.

𝑣 = ѡ𝑟 (8)

Where ѡ is the angular velocity in rad/s- 𝑣 is the Cutting speed in m/s -r is the radius in meters.

Figure 4:load cell calibration to get the thrust force and the cutting force

Figure 5: processed data of the forces and other quantities

Rake Average Average Normal Friction Resultant Friction Shear Specific 𝞫-𝛂
angle thrust cutting force force force angle angle cutting ,(°)
𝛼° force force (N) (N) (N) 𝛽° ϕ energy
N-
m/mm^3
10 124.87 579.03 548.55 223.52 592.34 22.16 38.92 1.355 12.16
20 118.64 403.28 338.38 249.42 420.37 36.39 36.81 0.9439 19.39
30 54.61 172.72 122.27 133.65 181.15 47.55 36.22 0.404 17.55
12

4.3 Results
Figure 8 shows how the average thrust force(N) is affected with different values of rake angles. The rake
angles used in this graph are 10°,20° and 30°.

150

Average thrusting 100

froce
50

0
0 10 20 30 40

Rake angles,𝛂(°)

Figure 6:Average Thrusting force

Figure 9 illustrates the relationship between the average cutting force (in newtons) found from the readings
given by the dynamometer and the different rake angles selected.

800
Average cutting force

600

400

200

0
0 10 20 30 40
Rake angles,𝛂(°)

Figure 7:Average cutting force

Figure 10 shows how specific cutting energy in N-m/mm^3 changes with different rake angles used in this
experiment. Which are 10°,20° and 30°.
13

1,5

SPECIFIC CUTTING ENERGY

1

0,5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
RAKE ANGLE,𝛂(°)

Figure 8:specific cutting energy vs rake angle

Figure 11 illustrates the relationship between the friction angle and the rakes angles selected in this
experiment.

50
Friction Angle,𝞫(°)

40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Rake Angle, 𝛂(°)

Figure 9: Friction angle

Figure 12 below shows the relationship between the shear angles and the difference between the friction
angles and the rake angles.

39,5
39
shear angleϕ,(°)

38,5
38
37,5
37
36,5
36
0 5 10 15 20
𝞫-𝛂,(°)

Figure 10: the difference of friction angle and rake angle vs shear angle
14

Figure 13 below shows the relationship between the shear angle and the various rake angle used in the
experiment. The rake angle and 10°,20° and 30°.

39,5

Shear Angles ϕ,(°)

39
38,5
38
37,5
37
36,5
36
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Rake Angles 𝛂,(°)

Figure 11:shear angle vs rake angle

5. Discussion
5.2 Forces correlation with the Rake angle
Figure 8 shows how the average thrusting force is being affected as rake angle is increased with changing
the cutting tool. It can be observed that with increasing rake angle there is a decrease in the thrusting force
of the tool. For a 10° tool an average thrusting force of 124.87 N was found. An average magnitude of
118.64 N of the thrusting force was found and 64.61 N was found for the rake angle of 30°. This may be
due to the shear plane formed by the tool. That with an increasing rake angle the tool forms smaller shear
plane area resulting in requiring lesser thrusting force to go against the chip being formed.

Figure 9 illustrates the relationship between the average cutting force found from the readings given by the
dynamometer and various rake angles. Three tools of different rake angles were used in the experiment.
From Figure 9 it can be observed that as the rake angle is being increased from 10 degrees to 30 degrees,
there is a decrease in the cutting force required to cut off the chip from the hollow bar. For a rake angle of
10 degrees, an average cutting force of 579.03 N was found. For a tool with 20 degrees rake angle an
average cutting force of 403.28 was found and 172.72 N was found when using a tool of rake angle 30
degrees. It can then be seen from Figure 8, Figure 9 and the remaining force graphs found in the Appendix
B that forces in the metal cutting increases with decreasing rake angle and decreases with increasing rake
angle this can be because of the shear plane area. That the smaller it becomes the lesser forces are required
to cut off the chips in the hollow chip. This can then lead to saying to save energy a component of higher
rake angle has to be used in metal cutting

The merchant’s equation says, an increase in the rake angle causes the shear plane angle to increase. This
will then lead to smaller shear plane area and since the shear strength is applied across the area, the shear
force required to form the chip will decrease. This will result in lower cutting forces required, making the
15

machine use less energy to operate. Looking at Figure 13, as you increase the rake angle the shear angle
decreases. A shear plane angle of 38.92 degrees was found for a 10 degrees rake angle, 36.81 degrees of
shear plane angle was found for a 20 degrees rake angle and 36.22 degrees was found for a 10 degrees rake
angle. The inverse relationship means that as you increase the rake angle high forces are required to cut the
material. This means that the machine will require a lot of energy as you increase the rake angle. Figure 13
is going against the merchant’s theory equation. Reason for this could be because proper precautions were
not followed making our results to go against the theory. Chances are the tools have been used repeatedly,
resulting in it giving inaccurate results. Another reason to this could be the tools moved from a fixed
position as they were moved closely to the hollow bar, leading to imprecise readings of forces. Merchants
theory has assumptions, like the tool is sharp or the chip behaves as a rigid body held in equilibrium. In a
real world such assumptions may not hold as such it could be wrong in some ways.

The merchant’s theory also says as you increase the rake angles, a decreased friction angle or the coefficient
of friction should result as the shear plane angle has increased. Figure 11 goes against the theory as it can
be observed that as you increase the rake angle the friction angle is being increased. A magnitude of 22.16°
friction angle was found for a 10° rake angle. A 36.39° friction angle was found for a 20° rake angle and a
47.55° friction angle was found for a 30° rake angle. Reason for the graph going against the merchant’s
theory could because the precautions were not followed accordingly. As mentioned in the previous
paragraph merchant’s theory has a lot of assumptions, like the edge of the tool being sharp. It could happen
that in the experiment some of the assumptions were not covered causing the friction angle and the rake
angle to have a positive relationship. Looking at the figures in the Appendix D the accumulation on the tool
edge was high for rake angle 10° and it was low for rake angle 30°. This is caused by the friction force
which is high in the 10 degrees rake angle as it can be seen in Appendix B. The friction force is responsible
for causing pieces of the hollow bar to stick fast to the rake face of the tool while the chip is being created.
This accumulation is unwanted as occasionally when it falls, it can carry the tool rank face, resulting in the
life of the tool diminishing. This then says that with increasing rake angle the life of the tool increases.

Figure 10 says the specific cutting energy will decrease as you increase the rake angle. This is because of
the cutting force that decreases as you increase the rake angle. This supports the merchant’s theory. That
with increasing rake angle less energy will be required to cut the chip of the hollow bar. With a decreased
specific cutting energy, a low shear area will results causing the shear angle to increase. This supports the
merchant’s equation in all directions that an increase in the rake angle causes an increase in the shear angle,
which results to the machine requiring less force to cut. Figure 12 shows the relationship between the shear
angles and the difference between the friction angles and the rake angles. It can be observed that the shear
angle decreases as the difference between the friction angle and the rake angle increases. This holds true
16

for the merchant’s equation as the difference between the rake angle and the friction angle increases with
the shear angle as it is seen in equation 2. It makes sense for the opposite of the difference to decrease with
the shear angle.

6. Conclusions
• The rake angle increases with decreasing specific cutting energy. This conclusion agrees with the
merchant’s theory as observed in the discussion.
• The rake angle increases with decreasing cutting forces, this also agrees with the merchant’s theory.
• The rake angle increases with decreasing friction angle. Although it wasn’t proven in this
experiment the theory remain true as human errors are always while conducting an experiment.
• The rake angle increases with increasing shear angle. This was also not proven, reasons were given
in the discussion section. Maybe some of the assumptions were violated.
• As the rake angle increases so is the life of the tool.
• The merchant’s theory holds true if its assumptions are not violated and if the precautions and the
procedure is followed correctly.
17

References
1. Scribd. (2018). Theory of Metal Cutting | Machining | Steel. [online] Available at:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/7106885/Theory-of-Metal-Cutting [Accessed 11 Oct. 2018].in t
2. Your Article Library. (2018). Metal Cutting: Meaning, History and Principles | Metallurgy. [online]
Available at: http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/metallurgy/metal-cutting/metal-cutting-meaning-
history-and-principles-metallurgy/96161 [Accessed 11 Oct. 2018].
3. Scribd. (2018). Metal Cutting | Machining | Wear. [online] Available at:
https://www.scribd.com/presentation/100210450/Metal-Cutting [Accessed 11 Oct. 2018].
4. Scribd. (2018). Experimental Examination of Main Cutting Force and Surface Roughness
Depending on Cutting Parameters | Machining | Materials. [online] Available at:
https://www.scribd.com/document/295806992/Experimental-Examination-of-Main-Cutting-
Force-and-Surface-Roughness-Depending-on-Cutting-Parameters [Accessed 12 Oct. 2018].
5. Ionel Botef (2018), Theory of Metal Machining and Cutting Tool Technology. [Accessed 12 Oct.
2018].
18

Appendix A: Forces Equations and The Merchants Circle

𝐹 = 𝐹𝑐 sin 𝛼 + 𝐹𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛼 (3)

𝑁 = 𝐹𝑐 cos 𝛼 − 𝐹𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛼 (4)

𝐹𝑠 = 𝐹𝑐 cos 𝜙 − 𝐹𝑡 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜙 (5)

𝐹𝑛 = 𝐹𝑐 sin 𝜙 + 𝐹𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜙 (6)

Figure 12:Merchants Circle

19

Appendix B: The remaining graphs of forces vs rake angles

Resultant force vs rake angle

700
600

resultant force
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40
rake angle

Friction force vs rake angle

300
250
friction force

200
150
100
50
0
0 10 20 30 40
rake angle

Normal force vs the rake angles

600
500
Normal force

400
300
200
100
0
0 10 20 30 40
rake angle

Figure 13: remaining graphs of forces against rake angle

20

Appendix C: images of the Apparatus

Figure 14: Apparatus used in the experiment

Appendix D: Images of a build-up in the cutting tools

Figure 15: Microscope image for rake angle 10°

Figure 16: Microscope image for rake angle 20°

Figure 17:Microscope image for rake angle 30°

Appendix E : raw data for 10 and 20 degrees

3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
31

56

81
11
16
21
26

36
41
46
51

61
66
71
76

86
91
96
6

106

131

156
1

101

111
116
121
126

136
141
146
151

161
166
171
176
181
186
191

Channel A value Channel C Value

Figure 18: voltage raw data of 10 degrees rake angle

21

1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0

97
13
19
25
31
37
43
49
55
61
67
73
79
85
91

103
1
7

109
115
121
127
133
139
145
151
157
163
169
175
Channel A value Channel C Value

Figure 19: voltage raw data of 20 degrees

22

Appendix F: The risk Analysis and the calculations for Rake angle 30°