Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Procedia CIRP 2 (2012) 74 – 78

1st CIRP Global Web Conference: Interdisciplinary Research in Production Engineering

Modeling and simulation of electrical discharge machining

E. Weingärtnera,*, F. Kustera, K. Wegenera
a
Institute of Machine Tools and Manufacturing, ETH, Tannenstrasse 3, Zurich 8092, Switzerland
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +41-44-632-0495; fax: +41-44-632-1125. E-mail address: weingaertner@iwf.mavt.ethz.ch.

Abstract

Electrical discharge machining involves complex physical processes occurring simultaneously, which lead to the removal of
material from both electrodes. During the discharge, material melts, evaporates and is ejected when the plasma channel collapses.
Modeling the erosion process can help to better interpret and predict results, which are otherwise difficult to understand. In this
work, the material removal rate is predicted based on the simulation of single discharges. It was found that a better correlation with
experimental results is achieved when the latent heats of fusion and evaporation are taken into consideration, as well as
temperature-dependent thermo-physical properties of the workpiece.

© 2012
2012 The Authors.
Published byPublished by Elsevier
Elsevier BV. B.V.
Selection Selection
and/or and/or peer-review
peer-review under responsibility
under responsibility of Dr.W.
of Dr. Ir. Wessel Ir. Wessel
Wits W. Wits
Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Keywords: Wire EDM; Modeling; Simulation

discharge. In this context, analytical and numerical

1. Introduction
In electrical discharge machining (EDM), material is
removed when several consecutive discharges occur
between a tool electrode and a workpiece electrode,
which are immersed in a dielectric media. The physical
processes associated with an electrical discharge and the
consequent removal of material are not yet fully
understood [1], so that it is still difficult to combine
relevant influences in a comprehensive model [2]. In
general, attempts are focused in modeling the plasma
channel, material removal rate (MRR) and tool wear.
To model the material removal rate, EDM is
generally described based on an electro-thermal
mechanism [3-8]. In this case, material is removed due
to high temperatures achieved in the plasma channel
during the discharge (high densities of electrical
current). In most model approaches, the temperature
distribution inside the workpiece, due to a specific
modeled heat source applied to the workpiece, is
calculated and the volume of material that achieves
temperatures higher than the melting temperature is
assumed to be removed. Thus, single discharges are
normally modeled and the material removal rate is
calculated based on the molten material per single
models have been proposed to describe EDM discharges.
One particular characteristic that distinguishes
different models is the way how the heat source is
defined. A point heat source, for example, can be used
[7]. In this case, analytical solutions that describe the
melt front can be easier derived. However, the shapes of
simulated craters are in general significantly different to
the measured ones. In several models [3-6], a disc heat
source is used for modeling the heat flow to the
workpiece. Again, analytical solutions that describe the
molten pool are derived, but in general considerable
differences between simulated and measured craters are
found. Patel et al. [4] proposed the use of a Gaussian-
distributed heat source upon the anode for calculating
the temperature distribution and provided an analytical
solution for the partial differential equation that
describes heat conduction. Simulation results were better
correlated for intensive discharges, where higher
currents and longer pulses where applied. For less
energetic discharges, however, high discrepancies
between simulation and experimental results were found.
It is stated that the plasma flushing efficiency is lower
for less energetic pulses, i.e. the efficiency of molten
material removal is lower in this case, the reason for the
aforementioned discrepancies.

2212-8271 © 2012 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Dr. Ir. Wessel W. Wits
Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2012.05.043
 E. Weingärtner et al. / Procedia CIRP 2 (2012) 74 – 78
Another characteristic that distinguishes different
models is the way how the material properties are taken
into consideration. In general, constant thermo-physical
properties of the workpiece are considered, i.e. its
dependency on the temperature is neglected. Moreover,
the great majority of erosion models do not consider the
latent heats of fusion and vaporization.
Based on the above mentioned issues, this work aims
to assess the influence of the type of heat source on
modeling single discharges, as well as the influence of
temperature-dependent material properties and the latent
heats of fusion and vaporization on simulation results.
First, the model concept is described, followed by a
description of the necessary model inputs. Finally,
simulation and experimental results are discussed.
2. Concept of erosion model
In this work, the wire electrical discharge machining
(WEDM) process is assessed. For modeling the
transmission of the heat generated in a single discharge
to the workpiece/anode, a heat conduction phenomenon
was assumed. Eq. 1 describes the partial differential
equation for heat conduction in Cartesian coordinates [9]
and Eq. 2 describes the thermal diffusivity
డమ ் డమ ் డమ ் ௤ሶ ଵ డ்
൅ ൅ ൅ ൌ ή (1)
డ௫ మ డ௬ మ డ௭ మ ௞ ఈ డ௧
௞
ߙൌ
ఘή௖೛
where T is the temperature, x, y and z represent the
Cartesian coordinate system, ‫ݍ‬ሶ is the rate of thermal
energy generation per unit volume (W/m3), k is the
thermal conductivity, D is the thermal diffusivity, t
represents the time, U the mass density and cp is the
specific heat.
Analytical methods can be used for solving Eq. 1, but
are rather applied for steady, two-dimensional
conduction problems. Numerical techniques can be
extended to three-dimensional problems and can better
cope with more complex geometries and boundary
conditions. The finite-difference method is a numerical
technique that is used as a basis for modeling the
electrical discharge machining process in this work. The
finite-difference method, where time and space are
discretized, allows temperature calculation in different
discrete nodal points inside the workpiece.
The heat source is modeled based on three different
shapes: point heat source, disc heat source and time-
dependent heat source. In the latter case, the heat source
grows from a point to a disc heat source during the
discharge duration. Single discharges are then simulated
based on several model inputs, which are listed in the
following section.
75
3. Erosion model inputs
According to Eq. 1, the temperature distribution can
be solved by knowing the rate of energy generation per
unit volume ‫ݍ‬ሶ , the thermal diffusivity D and the time t.
Thus, erosion parameters and the thermophysical
properties of the workpiece have to be used as model
inputs. Moreover, the energy associated to material
phase changes is also taken into consideration, i.e. the
latent heats of fusion and vaporization. The inputs used
in the proposed model are described below.
3.1. Erosion parameters
In WEDM, short discharge durations and high peak
currents are usually applied. This allows for high
material removal rates. Furthermore, a relatively long
pulse interval time is required to avoid wire breakage.
The discharge peak current ie, discharge duration time te
and effective discharge frequency fe were measured
using an oscilloscope type LeCroy WaveRunner 44MXi-
A. The discharge burning voltage was assumed to be
constant over the discharge duration time at 20V. Table
1 shows the discharge duration and peak current
measured for different pulses, named here I1 to I6. The
duration time ranges from 1 to 1.8 μs and the peak
current from 88 to 223 A. The measurements were
carried out on a Wire Cut electrical discharge machine
type AC Progress VP4 from GF AgieCharmilles.
(2)
Table 1. Peak current and discharge duration for six discharge pulses
Discharge pulses I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 I6
Peak current, ie [A] 88 100 128 152 188 223
Discharge duration, te [μs] 1.00 1.05 1.25 1.35 1.55 1.80
Table 2 shows the results obtained for four different
pulse interval times and average values for three
different discharge currents, namely I3, I4 and I5. The
theoretical pulse frequencies fp were calculated
considering only the pulse interval times, since discharge
duration times are many times shorter than the pulse
interval times and differ for different discharge pulses
(see Table 1). The discharge frequency ratio O, which
represents the ratio between the effective discharge
frequency fe (measured) to the theoretical pulse
frequency fp, is also presented in Table 2. Since the
erosion model predicts only the amount of eroded
material per single discharge, this result has to be
multiplied by the effective discharge frequency for
obtaining the material removal rate. According to the
results presented in Table 2, a common discharge
frequency ratio of O = 39.5% (average of all frequency
ratios) was chosen to be used as input in the model, for
all different pulse interval times.
76 E. Weingärtner et al. / Procedia CIRP 2 (2012) 74 – 78

Table 2. Pulse interval time and frequencies different materials respond to changes in temperature
can vary substantially [13]. It is, however, difficult to
Pulse interval time [μs] 71.8 50.5 35.0 27.2 find available data for different materials over a wide
Pulse frequency, fp [kHz] 13.9 19.8 28.5 36.7 range of temperatures, especially in the case of alloys.
Effective frequency, fe [kHz] 5.6 7.9 11.3 14.1 Data has to be collected from several publications, as
Discharge freq. ratio, O=fe/fp [%] 40.4 39.9 39.6 38.4 shown in Fig 1 and Fig 2, or, in some cases,
approximated based on the different chemical elements
that compose the material. For all materials used in this
3.2. Thermophysical properties of workpiece materials work, the thermophysical properties were considered
temperature-dependent, and this characteristic was
The thermophysical properties of a material play a implemented in the proposed model by lookup tables.
decisive role in EDM, influencing its machinability. In
this context, the melting and boiling temperatures are of
great importance. Generally, materials with lower
melting temperatures can be eroded faster (higher MRR
are achieved). In the heat conduction equation presented
in Eq. 1, the thermophysical properties of a material are
grouped in an important variable named thermal
diffusivity α. It represents the ratio of the thermal
conductivity k to the heat capacity (the product of mass
density U and specific heat cp) and measures the ability
of a material to conduct thermal energy relative to its
ability to store thermal energy [9]. In several erosion
models [3, 4, 6, 8, 10], these thermophysical properties
are assumed to be constant, not dependent on the
temperature. However, these properties are in general
significantly affected by the temperature and therefore
can influence the accuracy of numerical results. In order Fig. 2. Temperature dependence of the specific heat in copper:
to illustrate how some material properties vary with Reference 1 [9]; Reference 2 [11]; Reference 3 [12]
temperature, Fig 1 and Fig 2 show, respectively, the
thermal conductivity and specific heat of pure copper for 3.3. Latent heat of fusion and vaporization
temperatures up to 3500 K [9, 11, 12].
When a material is heated and a phase change occurs,
e.g. melting or evaporation, energy is absorbed during
this transition process without changing the material
temperature. Fig 3 shows a schematic representation of
these different phases, i.e. warming up, melting and
evaporation of an arbitrary material.

gas
Temperature

liquid
phase change
(evaporation)
solid
phase change
Fig. 1. Temperature dependence of the thermal conductivity in copper: (melting)
Reference 1 [9]; Reference 2 [11]
Energy input
The thermal conductivity varies significantly when Fig. 3. Phase changes (latent heat of fusion and vaporization)
copper changes from solid to liquid (melting point of
1358 K) and the specific heat increases until the melting The energy associated with the phase changes are
temperature is reached, staying relatively constant called specific latent heat of fusion Lf and vaporization
afterwards. The way how thermophysical properties of Lv, and express the amount of energy Q necessary to
 E. Weingärtner et al. / Procedia CIRP 2 (2012) 74 – 78
melt or evaporate 1 kg of material. Most EDM models
do not take the latent heats of fusion and vaporization
into account. As a result, deeper craters are generated,
since the latent heat poses a further resistance to the flux
of heat into the material.
4. Results and discussion
In this section, the influence of the applied heat
source type is first presented. Results of material
removal rate for different materials are then discussed.
4.1. Type of heat source
The cross sections of six simulated craters are shown
in Fig 4. Each picture represents a 50x150 μm area,
where the red dark color characterizes the melting pool.
In addition, the values of crater depth hc and crater
diameter dc are also provided. Pure aluminum was used
as base material, the peak current was set to ie = 128 A
and the discharge duration to te = 1.25 μs. Aluminum
melts at Tmelt = 993 K, boils at Tboil = 2792 K, has a latent
heat of fusion of Lf = 10.71 kJ/mol and latent heat of
vaporization of Lv = 294 kJ/mol. At standard conditions
for temperature and pressure, aluminum has a mass
density of U = 2702 kg/m3, a specific heat capacity of cp
= 903 J/kgK and thermal conductivity of k = 237 W/mK.
Fig. 4. Influence of different types of heat sources: a) point heat
source; b) disc heat source; c) time dependent heat source; d) +
temperature dependent material properties; e) + latent heat of fusion; f)
+ latent heat of vaporization
In Fig 4a, a point heat source was applied, i.e. the
heat flux, in this case, was concentrated in a point of
diameter equals 5 Pm. The generated crater was almost a
semi-sphere, with a depth of 31 Pm and diameter of 36
Pm. In Fig 4b a disc heat source was used with a
diameter of 80 Pm, where a crater depth of 22 Pm and
diameter of 99 Pm was generated. In Fig 4c a time-
dependent heat source was applied, i.e. the heat flux was
applied to a diameter of 5 Pm at the beginning of the
discharge and increased up to a diameter of 80 Pm at the
end of the discharge duration. In all of the above
77
mentioned types of heat sources, the generated craters
were huge when compared to measured ones. Only
constant thermophysical properties of the workpiece
material were considered for all three cases. In Fig 4d,
however, temperature-dependent properties were taken
into consideration and a time-dependent heat source was
applied. It can be seen that the dimensions of the
simulated crater changes considerably. Now a smaller
crater of depth hc = 16 Pm and diameter dc = 84 Pm was
generated. In Fig 4e the latent heat of fusion was
implemented and in Fig 4f the latent heats of fusion and
vaporization were considered. Especially the depth of
the simulated craters decreased when the latent heats
were applied. The shape of the eroded craters became
more and more similar to the shape of measured craters.
Fig 5 shows the measured cross section of a crater
generated on a single discharge experiment, using the
same erosion parameters as for simulating the craters
showed in Fig 4. The measured crater has a diameter of
dc = 82 μm and depth of hc = 8.1 μm, which is very
similar to the simulated crater shown in Fig 4f. In
conclusion, the best approach to be used when modeling
single craters in EDM is a time-dependent heat source,
where temperature-dependent properties of the
workpiece as well as the latent heats of fusion and
vaporization are considered.
Fig. 5. Measured cross section of an eroded crater in aluminum
4.2. Material removal rate
To calculate the MRR based on the simulation of
single discharges, the amount of molten material per
single discharge has to be multiplied by the effective
discharge frequency fe (see Table 2). Fig 6 and Fig 7
show experimental and simulation results of MRR
obtained respectively for a brass workpiece
(CuZn39Pb3) and a steel workpiece (AISI1010). Four
different peak currents (I3-I6) and a pulse interval time
of 35 μs were applied. In simulation 1, the thermo-
physical properties of the workpiece were assumed to be
temperature-dependent, and the latent heats of fusion
and vaporization were taken into consideration. In both
cases it is clear to see that these simulations are well
correlated to the experimental results. In simulation 2,
both latent heats of fusion and vaporization were
neglected. It can be observed that the simulated MRR
considerably differs from the experimental results. This
occurs because a certain amount of energy is involved in
78 E. Weingärtner et al. / Procedia CIRP 2 (2012) 74 – 78
changes of phase. Without considering the resistant
imposed by these changes of phase during the
simulation, heat can penetrate more deeply into the
workpiece, causing an increase in the amount of molten
material. In simulation 3, not only the latent heats were
neglected, but also the material properties were assumed
to be constant, not dependent on the temperature. A
further increase in the simulated MRR is observed for
both materials. This occurs because in both cases the
specific heat and thermal conductivity behave similarly
as in Fig 1 and Fig 2 (properties are temperature-
dependent). The specific heat increases when the
temperature is increased, so that the materials’ ability to
store thermal energy increases. On the other hand, the
thermal conductivity decreases by increasing the
temperature, so that the materials’ ability to conduct
thermal energy decreases. In both cases, the thermal
energy tends to stay more concentrated instead of being
transmitted more deeply into the material.
Fig. 6. Experimental versus simulation results for brass (CuZn39Pb3):
Simul. 1: temperature-dependent material properties and latent heats;
Simul. 2: temperature-dependent material properties without latent
heats; Simul. 3: constant material properties without latent heats
Fig. 7. Experimental versus simulation results for steel (AISI1010):
Simul. 1: temperature-dependent material properties and latent heats;
Simul. 2: temperature-dependent material properties without latent
heats; Simul. 3: constant material properties without latent heats
In comparison to brass, steel shows higher sensitivity
to temperature changes (difference between simulation 2
and simulation 3). Due to lack of data, only the solid
state was considered to be temperature-dependent, more
specifically, for steel up to 1300 K and brass up to 600
K, which can be one reason for these differences.
5. Conclusions
A thermo-electrical model was used for predicting the
MRR of different materials. In comparison to point and
disc heat sources, a time-dependent heat source was
found to be more suitable to predict the shape of eroded
craters. Moreover, better simulation results were
achieved when considering the material properties as
temperature-dependent. In addition, the latent heats of
fusion and vaporization showed to have a significant
influence on simulation results. Thus, to achieve a better
correlation between simulation and experimental results,
a time-dependent heat source has to be applied, while
temperature-dependent material properties and the latent
heats of fusion and vaporization must be considered.
References
[1] Klocke, F., König, W., 2007. Funkenerosives Abtragen (EDM) -
Fertigungsverfahren 3, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, p. 3-126.
[2] Yeo, S.H., Kurnia, W., Tan, P.C., 2008. Critical assessment and
numerical comparison of electro-thermal models in EDM. Journal
of Materials Processing Technology 203(1-3), p. 241.
[3] Tariq Jilani, S., Pandey, P.C., 1982. Analysis and modelling of
edm parameters. Precision Engineering 4(4), p. 215.
[4] Patel, M.R., Barrufet, M. A., Eubank, P. T., Dibitonto, D. D.,
1989. Theoretical-models of the electrical-discharge machining
process .2. The anode erosion model. Journal of Applied Physics
66(9), p. 4104.
[5] Yeo, S.H., Kurnia, W., Tan, P. C., 2007. Electro-thermal
modelling of anode and cathode in micro-EDM. Journal of
Physics D: Applied Physics 40(8), p. 2513.
[6] Van Dijck, F.S., Dutré, W.L., 1974. Heat conduction model for
the calculation of the volume of molten metal in electric
discharges. Journal of Applied Physics 7(6), p. 899.
[7] Dibitonto, D.D., Eubank, P. T., Patel, M. R., Barrufet, M. A.,
1989. Theoretical-models of the electrical-discharge machining
process .1. A simple cathode erosion model. Journal of Applied
Physics 66(9), p. 4095.
[8] Spur, G., Schönbeck, J., 1993. Anode Erosion in Wire-EDM - A
Theoretical Model. Annals of CIRP 42(1), p. 253.
[9] Incropera, F., DeWitt, D., Bergman, T., Lavine, A., 2007.
Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer. (sixth ed.)John Wiley
& Sons, New York.
[10] Beck, J.V., 1981. Transient temperatures in a semi-infinite
cylinder heated by a disk heat source. International Journal of
Heat and Mass Transfer 24(10), p. 1631.
[11] Iida, T., Guthrie, R. I. L., 1988. The physical properties of liquid
metals. Clarendon, Oxford.
[12] Gathers, G.R., 1983. Thermophysical properties of liquid copper
and aluminum. Int. Journal of Thermophysics 4(3), p. 209.
[13] Grimvall, G., 1999. Thermal conductivity, in Thermophysical
Properties of Materials, Elsevier Science B.V., p. 255.