Anda di halaman 1dari 11

International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

From the basic mechanics of orthogonal metal cutting toward the

identification of the constitutive equation
N. Tounsi a,, J. Vincenti b, A. Otho b, M.A. Elbestawi a
a

McMaster Manufacturing Research Institute (MMRI), McMaster University, JHE 316, 1280 Main Street West, Ham., ONT, Canada L8S 4L7
b
ENSAM, Laboratoire MECASURF, 2, Cours des Arts et Metiers, 13617 Aix-en-Provence Cedex, France
Received 24 January 2002; received in revised form 12 April 2002; accepted 22 April 2002

Abstract
This paper proposes a methodology to identify the material coefficients of constitutive equation within the practical range of
stress, strain, strain rate, and temperature encountered in metal cutting. This methodology is based on analytical modeling of the
orthogonal cutting process in conjunction with orthogonal cutting experiments. The basic mechanics governing the primary shear
zone have been re-evaluated for continuous chip formation process. The stress, strain, strain rate and temperature fields have been
theoretically derived leading to the expressions of the effective stress, strain, strain rate, and temperature on the main shear plane.
Orthogonal cutting experiments with different cutting conditions provide an evaluation of theses physical quantities. Applying the
least-square approximation techniques to the resulting values yields an estimation of the material coefficients of the constitutive
equation. This methodology has been applied for different materials. The good agreement between the resulting models and those
obtained using the compressive split Hopkinson bar (CSHB), where available, demonstrates the effectiveness of this methodology.
Keywords: Modeling; Metal cutting mechanics; Constitutive equation; Orthogonal cutting

1. Introduction
The physical phenomena taking part in metal cutting
are numerous and complex. Chip formation is the result
of material plastic deformation during relative motion
between the tool and the workpiece. Deformations are
large (greater than 1) and the strain rate reaches 104 to
106 s1. Moreover, sliding at the tool/chip interface happens under very hard conditions of pressure, strain rate
and temperature.
To analyze the cutting process and to explain how the
cutting parameters and the material properties influence
this process, both finite element method (FEM) and analytical modeling require flow stress data for the workpiece material as a function of strain, strain rate, and
temperature.
Kumar [1] and Ozel [2] tried to obtain the material

constants of the constitutive equation by matching FEM

predictions with measured forces in orthogonal cutting.
This approach requires calculation of the average values
of strain, strain rate and temperature in the primary shear
zone using a separate code that can process the FEM
results. Then, the flow stress data are input to the FEM
and tuned in iterative scheme till the prediction error for
cutting force becomes less than a tolerance error.
Shatla [3] used two dimensional (2D) orthogonal slot
milling experiments in conjunction with an analyticalbased computer code to determine the flow stress data as
a function of the high strain, strain rate, and temperature
encountered in machining. The cutting and feed forces
obtained from orthogonal slot milling experiments are
compared to those predicted from OXCUT using an
initial guess of the material constants of the constitutive
equation. OXCUT is a code based on Oxley theory for
orthogonal cutting. The material constants are tuned until
the forces predicted from OXCUT match those obtained
from experiments for all tool rotation angles. Two or three
runs at different orthogonal slot milling conditions will
result in a robust model for the constitutive equation.

PII: S 0 8 9 0 - 6 9 5 5 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 4 6 - 9

1374

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

Nomenclature
A,B,C0,n,m constants of JhonsonCook model
AB
main shear plane
Cp,K,r specific heat, thermal conductivity, and mass density of the material
primary shear zone thickness, and chip thickness
h,hc
P,PA,PB hydrostatic pressure, hydrostatic pressure at point A and B respectively
q
volumetric heat generation
s
uncut chip thickness
time, and time on plane AB
t,tAB
T,TAB,T0 temperature, temperature on plane AB, and room temperature
Tmelting melting temperature of the material
V,VAB cutting velocity, and cutting velocity on plane AB

Vxfn,Vyfn
components of the cutting velocity along X fn and Y fn directions
W
depth of cut

I,Ixn,Iyn

measured cutting force, and its components along X n and Y n directions

I AB,Ixfn,Iyfn

Rn,Rxfn,Ryfn

cutting force acting on plane AB, and its components along X fn and Y fn directions
Cartesian coordinate systems

X n,Y n,Z n,X fn,Y fn,Z fn,X gn,Y gn,Z gn vectors of the different Cartesian coordinate systems

xfn,yfn
coordinates along X fn and Y fn directions
a
proportion of the main shear zone
shear angle, and rake angle
fn,gn
s ,s d stress tensor, and deviatoric stress tensor

sfxn,sfyn
standard deviations of the components of the measured cutting forceI .
e ,e ,e AB strain tensor, effective strain, and effective strain on plane AB

e ,e ,e AB strain rate tensor, effective strain rate, and effective strain rate on plane AB
e xy,e 0 shear component of the strain rate tensor, and a reference effective strain rate
t,tAB,t0 shear stress, shear stress on plane AB, and shear stress at main shear zone inlet
b
fraction of the shear plane heat conducted into the work material
m
friction coefficient

These methodologies are time consuming. In addition,

the estimated material constants do not reflect only the
behavior of the workpiece material. They are implicitly
affected by the secondary shear zone modeling as well
as by the friction modeling along the tool/chip interface.
There are infinite combinations of friction and constitutive models that give the same predicted machining
force [2].
In this paper, a methodology to identify the material
constants of the constitutive equation is proposed. It is
based on analytical modeling of the primary shear zone
in conjunction with orthogonal cutting experiments. The
remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the basic mechanics describing the primary shear
zone in orthogonal cutting are re-evaluated. The velocity, strain, strain rate, stress, and temperature fields are
analytically described. In Section 3, an experimental
verification will be proposed along with a discussion.

Finally, this paper concludes with a summary of this

work and a prospectus of further activities.

2. Theory
The re-evaluation of the mechanics of orthogonal
metal cutting is based on an analysis of existing experimental work and FEM results. With reference to Fig. 1,
in the main shear zone, the iso-curves of the physical
quantities such as the effective shear stress, effective
strain rate and temperature are practically along straight
lines parallel to the main shear plane AB [48]. In
addition, both of Oxley [4] and Wu et al.[5] show that
the effective strain rate is maximum on the main shear
plane and vanishes at the boundaries of the primary shear
zone. Therefore, these physical quantities depend only
on one coordinate xfn. This coordinate is in the perpen-

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

Fig. 1.

1375

Distributions of velocity, shear stress, hydrostatic pressure, and effective strain rate in the primary shear zone.

dicular direction to the main shear plane. Furthermore,

the primary shear zone can be considered as a shear band
of constant thickness h, except near the tool edge [7].
The material flow through this band is analyzed and a
stationary solution is calculated under the following
assumptions:
Quasi-static conditions: many problems in plastic
theory are regarded as quasi-static since it is assumed
that the inertia forces due to the plastic flow may
be neglected.
Plane strain conditions: the depths of cut W are
chosen large enough compared to the uncut chip
thickness, s to ensure that plane strain deformation
conditions are maintained during machining.
Continuous chip formation process.
Sharp cutting edge: although this assumption is not
physically true, the uncut chip thickness is chosen to
be high enough so the edge effects on cutting forces
can be neglected since the ratio of ploughing forces
to the cutting forces becomes negligible.
Viscoplastic workpiece material: the workpiece
material is supposed homogeneous, with isotropic
hardening and governed by thermo-viscoplastic
constitutive equation.
In the primary shear zone, the shear stress, strain,
strain rate, and temperature fields depend only on the
coordinate xfn.
Constant thickness of the primary shear zone. The
main shear plane AB divides the primary shear zone
into two unequal parts characterized by the portion
a [9].
To conduct this study, three Cartesian coordinate sys-

tems are defined in Fig. 1: Rn (A,X n,Y n,Z n), Rgn

(A,X gn,Y gn,Z gn), and Rfn (A,X fn,Y fn,Z fn). A is the

feed and of the cutting speed respectively. X gn and Y gn

are tangential and orthogonal directions to the rake face

respectively. X fn and Y fn are orthogonal and tangential

to the main shear plane respectively.
2.1. Analysis of the velocity, strain and strain rate
fields
The velocity diagram, which defines the relationship
between velocity components in the machining zone, is
a fundamental issue because it defines the deformation
and friction energy spent in the cutting process. Knowing this diagram, all other physical quantities of the cutting process can be defined [9]. In the following, this
diagram along with the strain and strain rate fields are
determined.
Under plane strain conditions, the strain rate tensor is
defined in the frame Rfn by:

Vxfn
xfn
1 Vxfn Vyfn

2 yfn
xfn

1 Vxfn Vyfn

2 yfn
xfn
Vyfn
yfn

(1)

Rfn

The velocity field must satisfy the assumption of plastic incompressibility and, consequently, it obeys the following equation:

1376

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

Vxfn Vyfn

0
xfn
yfn

(2)

Since the velocity field depends only on the coordinate

xfn, the equation of plastic incompressibility (2) suggests
that the component of velocity normal to the shear plane
to be constant throughout the primary shear zone. The
velocity at the lower bound of the primary shear zone
should be equal to the cutting velocity. Therefore, the
velocity field can be expressed as:

Vxfn Vsin(fn)

where, fn is the shear angle. Eqs. (1) and (3) lead to the
definition of the effective strain rate:
1 Vyfn
2

e:e

3
3 xfn

| |

(4)

A piecewise linear distribution of the effective strain

rate is adopted as depicted in Fig. 1. The effective strain
rate is maximal at the main shear plane AB, where it is

denoted e AB. It vanishes at the lower and the upper

bound of the primary shear zone. Therefore, the distribution of the effective strain rate can be expressed as:

xfn

e e AB 1
for xfn[0:ah]
ah

e e AB 1

xfn
for xfn[(1a)h:0]
(1a)h

(5)

By replacing Eq. (4) into Eq. (5) and integrating with

regard to the variable xfn, the component Vyfn of the
velocity field can be expressed as:

x1

Vyfn
for xfn[0:h]
xfn

(1a)h:0]

x2
xfn=0

Vyfn
for xfn[
xfn

Vyfn|xfn=ah

(7)

xfn=0

Vcos(fn)Vyfn|xfn=(1a)h Vsin(fn) tan(fngn)

This system results in:
x1 x2

(8a)

ah
x13e AB Vcos(fn)
2

(8b)

(1a)h
x13e AB
Vsin(fn)tan(fngn)
2

(8c)

Subtracting (8c) from (8b) leads to x1 x2 1.

Consequently, the effective strain rate on the shear plane
is expressed as follows:
2 V cos(gn)

e AB
3 h cos(fngn)

(9)

Summing Eqs. (8b) and (8c) and replacing the effec

tive strain rate e AB by its expression lead to the definition
of the coefficient a:
a

1 cos(2fngn)

2
2cos(gn)

(10)

The strain rate field will be expressed as:

x2fn

Vyfn x1 3e AB xfn
VAB for xfn[0:ah]
2ah

Vyfn x2 3e AB xfn

(3)

Vyfn Vyfn(xfn)

expression of the effective strain rate should be continuous through the shear plane AB. The velocity is equal
to the cutting velocity at the lower bound of the primary
shear zone. It is equal to the chip flow velocity at the
upper bound of this zone. Therefore,

x2fn
VAB for xfn[(1a)h:0]
2(1a)h

(6)
where, VAB is the shear velocity on the main shear plane.
In continuous chip formation process, there is no chip
segmentation and therefore there is no velocity discontinuity. If the shear component of the cutting velocity
defined at the lower boundary of the deformation zone
is compared to the shear component of the chip velocity
defined at the upper bound, we notice a change of its
sign. The main shear plane is assumed to be the plane
where the shear velocity is equal to zero. Therefore, VAB
is equal to zero. x1and x2 are introduced in (6) to account
for the sign of the quantity Vyfn / xfn in both parts of
the primary shear zone. To determine these coefficients,
the boundary conditions of the velocity field as well as
the effective strain rate should be considered. The

e xy

1Vyfn
2 xfn

xfn

e xy 3e AB 1
for xfn[0:h]
ah

e xy 3e AB 1

xfn
for xfn[(1).h:0]
(1a)h
(11)

To determine the effective plastic strain, it should be

noticed that the shear occurs on parallel planes. Consequently, the main frame remains unchanged during plastic deformation. The physical quantities used in the
constitutive equation are objective independently of the
current configuration. The effective plastic strain e AB on
the main shear plane AB can then be obtained directly

by integrating the effective strain rate e with regards to

the time variable and along the first part of the primary

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

1377

shear zone. The plastic deformation is supposed to be

initiated on the lower bound of the primary shear zone,
i.e. at time t 0, and reaches e AB on the shear plane at
time t tAB:
t

AB

e AB

e dt

(12)

Since the component of the velocity Vxfn normal to

the shear zone is constant throughout this zone, the
increment of time can be related to the increment of
space by the following relationship:
dxfn
dxfn
dt
(13)
Vxfn
dt
Vsin(fn)
Consequently, the effective strain can be determined
by the following expression:

Fig. 2.

ah

e AB

dxfn
e
Vsin(fn)

(14)

Replacing in this equation the effective strain rate by its

expression yields the expression of the effective strain
on the main shear plane:
acos(gn)
(15)
e AB
3cos(fngn)sin(fn)
It should be noticed that the primary shear zone thickness h is needed to evaluate the effective strain rate

e AB expressed by (9). Kececioglu measured h in the

range of speed 40250 m/min [10]. His results show that
h is approximately one-quarter of the uncut chip thickness. Dudzenski used a typical value of this parameter,
i.e. h 0.025mm [7]. Based on geometrical analysis of
quick stop micrograph from cutting experiments available in literature [6,11,12], the shear band thickness is
approximately one-half of the uncut chip thickness. The
boundaries of the shear band have been located based
on the grain density and orientation in the case of [11]
and [6] (Figs. 2 and 3). However, they are located based
on a grid deformation in the case of [12] (Fig. 4). Furthermore, if we observe the temperature distributions
depicted in Figs. 11c, 13a and b in the paper published
by Komanduri [8], h can be approximated once again by
one-half the uncut chip thickness. The exact proportion
is reported in Table 5. Therefore, the shear band thickness will be approximated by one-half the uncut chip
thickness throughout this study, i.e. h 0.5s.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

2.2. Analysis of the stress field

The stress tensor in the frame Rfn is expressed as:

P t 0
s t P 0

0 0 P

Rfn

(16)

where, P is the hydrostatic pressure and t, the shear

stress. Since the shear stress t depends only on the coordinate xfn, the equation of local equilibrium div(s )

0 yields:

1378

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

P
t

0
xfn yfn

(17)

P
0
xfn

To solve this system with partial derivatives, some

boundary conditions should be addressed. The lower
boundary of the primary shear zone is where the plastic
deformation starts to occur. Therefore the shear stress at
this boundary can be derived from the elastic stress se
using the formula t0 (se / 3). The pressure at point
B is denoted PB. The shear stress on the main shear plane
is denoted tAB. These boundary conditions associated to
system (17) yield the stress field in the primary shear
zone:

t (t0tAB)

xfn
tAB
ah

(18)

(t0tAB)
s
P
yfn
PB
ah
sin(fn)

To determine the effective shear stress tAB, the cutting

force is supposed to be measured during orthogonal cutting experiments. Let denote the measured cutting force

Ixn

(19)

Iyn Rn

plane AB and acting on the chip, denoted I AB, can be

expressed as:
s

I AB

(s X fn)X fndyfn

/ sin(fn)

I AB

/ sin(fn)

(t0tAB)

2ah

s
s2
PB
sin(fn)2
sin(fn)

s
WtAB
sin(fn)

(20a)

(20b)

Rfn

I AB W

(t0tAB) s
s
PB
cos(fn)tABs
2ah sin(fn)2
sin(fn)
(t0tAB)

sin(fn)
(Iyncos(fn)Ixnsin(fn))
Ws

tABscos(fn)
s
s2
PB
sin(fn)
2ah sin(fn)2
sin(fn)
sin(fn) R
n

(21)

(22)

2.3. Analysis of the temperature field

The heat transfer process occurring during orthogonal
machining is governed by the two dimensional heat
transfer equation:

T
T
Vyfn
q 0
KTrCp Vxfn
xfn
yfn

(23)

In cutting, the boundary upon the shear band is usually

considered adiabatic [8]. For heat resistant materials, the
thermal conductivity is negligible and the primary shear
zone is considered to be under adiabatic conditions.
Therefore, the volumetric heat generated by conduction
is negligible:
KT0

(24)

If the friction in the primary shear zone is neglected,

the volumetric heat generation rate q will be caused by
the plastic deformation only:

(25)
q s d:e

d
where, s and e are the deviatoric stress and strain rate
tensors respectively. Consequently, and since the temperature depends only on the coordinate xfn, the heat
transfer (23) becomes:
T

s d:e
xfn

(26)

Although all properties of the material appearing in

the heat transfer equation may be temperature dependent,
they are assumed to be constant. Indeed, the variation
of these properties with temperature cannot be considered due to the complexity involved in the analytical
method and consequently only average values are taken.
Replacing the stress and strain rate tensors by their
expressions and integrating the resulting equation with
regards to the variable xfn, the temperature in the primary zone can be expressed as:

3e

xfn

Re-expressing this force I AB in the global frame Rn

results in:
2

tAB

rCpVxfn

(s X fn)Y fndyfn R
fn

Since the measured cutting force is equal to the force

applied on main shear plane and acting on the chip, the
Eqs. (27) and (28) lead to the expression of the shear
stress tAB:

tAB 1
Consequently:

xfn

T
dx
xfn fn
rCpsin(fn)V
AB

(t0tAB)

xfn
dx for xfn[0:h]
ah fn

xfn
ah

(27)

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

3e

T(xfn)TAB

AB

rCpsin(fn)V

(tABt0)x3fn (2tABt0)x2fn

tABxfn
3(ah)
2ah

(28)

On the lower bound of the primary shear zone, i.e.

xfn ah, the temperature is supposed to be equal to the
room temperature T0. Therefore, the temperature on the
main shear plane can be expressed as:
TAB T0

acos(gn)
2tAB t0
rCpsin(fn)cos(fngn)
3

(29)

2.4. Identification of the constitutive model

The constitutive equation can use different models
that express the flow stress t as a function of the effec
tive plastic strain e , the effective strain rate e , and the
temperature T. In this study, the JhonsonCook model
will be explored. It is defined by:

e
n
3t (A Be ) 1 C0ln e 1
(30)
0

TT0
TmeltingT0

where, e 0 is a reference strain rate, i.e. e 0 103s1. T0

is the room temperature. Tmelting is the melting temperature of the material. To determine the material constants
(A,B,n,C0,m) that characterize JhonsonCook model,
orthogonal cutting experiments have been carried out for
different cutting conditions. These experiments provide
an
evaluation
of
the
physical
quantities

(tAB,e AB,e AB,TAB) expressed on the main shear plane by

the formulae (9), (15), (22), and (29) respectively. A
least-square approximation technique will be applied to
determine the material constants:

(A Be AB(i)n

(A,B,n,C0,m) min

i1

e AB(i)
C0ln
e 0

3t

AB

TAB(i)T0

TmeltingT0

(i)

(31)

where, N is the number of experiments and i is the index

of the experiment.

These results are a valuable asset for the assessment of

the proposed methodology. Finally, the proportion a and
the temperature on the main shear plane TAB are estimated for different materials and compared with results
obtained by different researchers. The physical characteristics of these different steels are summarized in
Table 1.
Cylindrical turning experiments of thin tube workpiece were carried out under orthogonal cutting conditions. The wall thickness of the tube was very small
compared to its diameter. The cutting velocity can be
therefore considered constant along the cutting edge.
Two materials have been used: Stainless steel 316L and
35NCD16. The cutting conditions composed of the rake
angle gn, the cutting speed V, the depth of cut W, and
the feed S are summarized in Table 2. The three components of the machining force were measured simultaneously with a Kistler dynamometer type 3157B.
The dynamometer holds the turning tool. It is oriented
so that its X-axis is along the axis of revolution of the
workpiece. Each cutting experiment is carried out with
a new major cutting edge. The time of machining is limited to few seconds to avoid tool wear. The different
components of the cutting force are averaged on this period and their standard deviations are estimated. The
shear angle is calculated from the value of the measurement of the chip thickness hc according to the following formulae:
sin(fn)
s

hc cos(fngn)

To verify the effectiveness of the proposed methodology, orthogonal cutting experiments have been carried
out for two steels: stainless steel 316L, and 35NCD16.
This is followed by the use of additional experimental
steels: 42CD4U, and S300. This work provided the
material constants obtained by the use of the compressive split Hopkinson bar (CSHB) for these two steels.

(32)

temperature TAB, and the strain rate e AB are evaluated

according to the formulae (9), (10), (15), (22), and (29)
respectively. The results are summarized in Table 3.
The material coefficients of JhonsonCook model are
listed in Table 4 along with those obtained by CSHB,
where available. It can be noticed that the constant A is
approximately equal to the elastic yield strength se.
Indeed, for a null plastic strain, with a strain rate equal
to e 0 and at the room temperature, the Johnson-cook
model reduces to:

3|t| As

3. Experimental verification

1379

(33)

This is coherent with the fact that A depends particularly on the material properties (heat treatment,
hardness). Table 4 shows a good agreement between
the material constants (A,B,n,C0,m) obtained by the proposed methodology and those obtained by the CSHB
demonstrating the effectiveness of this methodology.
In this paper, the main shear plane AB is assumed to
divide the primary shear zone into two unequal parts
characterized by the constant a. Table 3 shows that this
constant is larger than 0.5 for all cutting experiments.
The first part of the primary shear zone is then a wide

1380

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

Table 1
Physical characteristics of the different materials
Material

Hardness HRC

s0 t03 (Mpa)

K (w/(m K) r (Kg/m3)

Cp (J/(Kg K)

Tmelting

35NCD16
Stainless steel 316L
42CD4U
S300

31
28

880
502
693
250

39
14.6

480
500
400
400

1800
1800
1800
1800

7860
7500
7860
7860

Table 2
Results of orthogonal cutting experiments
Test

V (m/min)

1
67.2
2
67.2
3
67.2
4
128.4
5
128.4
6
128.4
7
187.2
8
187.2
9
187.2
35NCD16
1
60
2
60
3
65
4
123
5
123
6
115.2
42CD4U
1
100
2
100
3
100
4
100
S300
1
200
2
200
3
200
4
200

S (mm)

W (mm) gn

hc (mm)

fn

sIxn (N)

sIyn (N)

0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.3

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0.25
0.44
0.63
0.25
0.43
0.65
0.25
0.47
0.62

22.0
24.5
25.5
22.0
25.0
25.0
22.0
23.0
26.0

456
605
872
401
593
720
465
523
630

564
881
1394
501
926
1298
547
848
1196

31
74
145
13
34
51
13
19
37

20
55
92
10
22
36
22
16
44

0.81
0.69
0.62
0.80
0.64
0.56
0.85
0.62
0.52

0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.3

2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1

0
0
0
0
0
0

0.23
0.43
0.53
0.20
0.37
0.53

23.5
25.0
29.5
26.5
28.5
29.5

515
691
810
470
561
640

608
964
1293
563
893
1165

26
48
72
25
44
28

19
36
45
20
26
22

0.85
0.72
0.63
0.84
0.63
0.55

0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4

3
3
3
3

6
6
6
6

0.20
0.39
0.59
0.79

28
28
28
28

550
700
750
800

800
1400
1800
2300

0.85
0.64
0.55
0.47

0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4

3
3
3
3

6
6
6
6

0.20
0.39
0.59
0.79

28
28
28
28

200
250
275
325

350
625
900
1100

0.72
0.53
0.42
0.40

region where the change of velocity takes place at low

rate. This part is delimited by the main shear plane, and
the line where the first deformation occurs. The second
part is a small region where this change of velocity takes
place at a higher rate. Furthermore, for different cutting
conditions and for different materials listed in Table 5,
the analytical estimate of the constant a using (10) is
compared to the geometrical estimate from the temperature distributions depicted in Figs. 11c, 13a, and b in the
Table 5 show good agreement between these estimates.
From Figs. 24, the constant a is geometrically estimated. In addition, the shear angle fn and the rake angle
gn, which are necessary for the analytical estimation of
a, are geometrically determined. The results are listed
in Table 6 and show good agreement between geometrical and analytical estimates of a. Therefore the analytical

formula derived theoretically to estimate the constant a

is valid.
As far as the temperature on the main shear plane is
concerned, the analytical estimate of the temperature TAB
using (29) is compared to the estimates of different models published in Ref. [8]. These models are composed of
Trigger and Chaos method, Boothroyds method,
Loewen and Shaws method, Leones method, and the
exact analysis proposed by Komanduri. They are
denoted M1, M2, M3, M4, and M5 respectively. These
models suppose that there is a fraction b of the shear
plane heat conducted into the work material. However,
the analytical development proposed in this paper supposes that b is nil since it considers the primary shear
zone as adiabatic zone. The materials, the cutting conditions, and the results are listed in Table 5. The analytical prediction of the temperature TAB using the

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

1381

Table 3
Estimation of the physical quantities for the different orthogonal cutting experiments
Test

Stainless steel 316L

1
0.862
2
0.829
3
0.815
4
0.862
5
0.822
6
0.825
7
0.862
8
0.847
9
0.810
35NCD16
1
0.841
2
0.822
3
0.757
4
0.800
5
0.774
6
0.757
42CD4U
1
0.823
2
0.823
3
0.823
4
0.823
S300
1
0.823
2
0.823
3
0.823
4
0.823

e AB

1.tAB (Mpa)

h (mm)

TABK

e AB (104 s1)

1.443
1.270
1.212
1.443
1.241
1.251
1.443
1.357
1.193

627
544
603
557
592
583
593
537
555

0.05
0.10
0.15
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.05
0.10
0.15

643
570
579
612
582
580
628
585
557

2.7859
1.4206
0.9550
5.3230
2.7253
1.8144
8.0093
4.0409
2.7538

1.328
1.241
1.020
1.155
1.068
1.020

702
615
596
656
617
574

0.05
0.10
0.15
0.05
0.10
0.15

689
630
566
622
585
559

2.5183
1.2735
0.9554
5.2932
2.6909
1.6984

1.086
1.086
1.086
1.086

701
710
645
647

0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20

660
663
637
638

4.1287
2.0643
1.3762
1.0322

1.086
1.086
1.086
1.086

337
340
347
325

0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20

464
465
468
459

8.2573
4.1287
2.7524
2.0643

Table 4
Material constants for different steels

35NCD16
Cutting exp.
CSHB
INOX316L
Cutting exp.
CSHB
42CD4U
Cutting exp.
CSHB
S300
Cutting exp.
CSHB

A (Mpa)

B (Mpa)

C0

848

474

0.288

0.0230

0.540

514

514

0.508

0.0417

0.533

589
598

755
768

0.198
0.209

0.0149
0.0137

0.800
0.807

245
240

608
622

0.35
0.35

0.0836
0.0900

0.144
0.250

developed formulation is in very good agreement with

the results of the exact analysis proposed by Komanduri.
Therefore, this formulation is valid.

4. Conclusion
A methodology is proposed in this paper to identify
the material constants of the constitutive equation using
analytical modeling of the orthogonal cutting process in

conjunction with orthogonal cutting experiments. A

JhonsonCook model for the constitutive equation is
explored.
A re-evaluation of the basic mechanics governing the
primary shear zone has provided analytical expressions
for the fields of velocity, strain, strain rate, stress, and
temperature. The physical quantities such as the effective
stress, effective strain, effective strain rate, and temperature have been expressed on the particular shear plane
AB.

1382

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

Table 5
Estimation of the quantities (TAB, h, a) for different materials, for different cutting conditions, and with different models

AISI 1113 steel [14]

gn 20,V 139.2m / min,s 0.06mmW 3.84mm,hc 0.1176mm
r 7860kg / m3,Cp 572J / (KgK)t0 414Mpa,Fxn 125N,Fyn
356N

b
TAB
h/s
a

M1
0.10
470

M2
0.18
491

M3
0.37
439

M4
0.36
443

M5
0.23
478
0.50
0.86

(29)
0.00
489
0.50
0.90

Mild steel [15]

gn 0,V 120m / min,s 0.25mmW 2.5mm,hc 0.833mmr
7860kg / m3,Cp 580J / (KgK)t0 400Mpa,Fxn 667N,Fyn 890N

b
TAB
h/s
a

0.10
506

0.10
548

0.28
492

0.26
500

0.16
531
0.56
0.86

0.00
546
0.50
0.92

Ne 9445 [16]
b
gn 4,V 91.5m /min,s 0.249mmW 2.59mm,hc 0.6637mmr TAB
h/s
7860kg / m3,Cp 500J / (KgK)t0 400Mpa,Fxn 854N,Fyn 1681N
a

0.10
656

0.08
753

0.26
642

0.24
654

0.16
693
0.48
0.68

0.00
698
0.50
0.89

Table 6
Geometrical and analytical estimates of the constant a
Data of Fig. 2
Rake angle gn
Shear angle fn
Geometrical estimate of a
Analytical estimate of a

20
25
0.86
0.95

Orthogonal cutting experiments with different cutting

conditions and different materials have provided an
evaluation of theses physical quantities. The material
constants of JhonsonCook model have been estimated
by applying the least-square approximation techniques
to the resulting values. The material constants estimated
by the proposed methodology are in good agreement
with those obtained by the CSHB, where available, demonstrating the effectiveness of this methodology. Since
the identification of these constants is based only on the
physical quantities expressed on the main shear plane
AB, the tool/chip interface and the secondary shear zone
do not affect this methodology. It is independent from
the tool surface texture and coating.
The constant a that characterizes the location of the
shear plane AB in the primary shear zone is found to be
larger than 0.5 for all cutting experiments. Therefore,
the shear plane divides the primary shear zone into two
unequal parts. The first part is the wide region where the
change of velocity takes place at low rate. The second
part is a small region where this change of velocity takes
place at a higher rate. The analytical estimates of this
constant based on the proposed formula agree well with
the geometrical ones from micrograph and pictures of
the primary shear zone.
The analytical predictions of the temperature TAB,
using the developed formula with different cutting conditions and materials, are in very good agreement with
the results of the exact analysis proposed by Komanduri

Data of Fig. 3
6
31
0.81
0.78

Data of Fig. 4
0
32
0.75
0.72

[8]. This indicates that the proposed expression of this

temperature is valid.
An investigation of the primary shear zone thickness
has to be conducted in order to establish an analytical
expression for it. This thickness influences the estimation
of the strain rate.
The proposed methodology provides the constitutive
equation for continuous chip flow formation. It does not
determine the limit of the yield strength or the maximum
shear stress as a function of strain, strain rate, and temperature. This aspect should be investigated in order to
provide the modeling of serrated chip formation process

References
[1] S. Kumar, P. Fallbohmer, T. Altan, Computer simulation of
orthogonal cutting process: determination of material properties
and effects of tool geometry on chip flow, Technical Paper
NAMRI/SME XXV, 1997, p. 177.
[2] T. Ozel, Investigation of High Speed Flat End Milling Process,
PhD Dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio,
1998.
[3] M. Shatla, C. Kerk, T. Altan, Process modeling in machining.
Part I: determination of flow stress data, International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 41 (2001) 15111534.
[4] P.L.B. Oxley, Introducing strain rate dependent work material
properties into the analysis of orthogonal cutting, Annals of the
CIRP 13 (1966) 127138.
[5] J.S. Wu, O.W. Dillon Jr., W.Y. Lu, Thermo-Viscoplastic Mode-

N. Tounsi et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 13731383

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

ling of Machining Process Using a mixed finite element method,

Computational Methods on Materials Processing, Winter Annual
Meeting of the American Society of Mechanical Engineering,
Nov. 813 1992. Anaheim, CA, USA, Materials Division
(Publication) MD, 39 (1992) 113128.
I.S. Jawahir, C.A. Van Luttervelt, Recent developments in chip
control research and application, Annals of the CIRP 42 (1993)
659693.
D. Dudzinski, A. Molinari, A modeling of cutting for viscoplastic
materials, International Journal of mechanical Science 39 (4)
(1997) 369389.
R. Komanduri, Z.B. Hou, Thermal modeling of the metal cutting
process. Part I: temperature rise distribution due to shear plane
heat source, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 42
(2000) 17151752.
V.P. Astakhov, M.O.M. Osman, M.T. Hayajneh, Re-evaluation
of the basic mechanics of orthogonal metal cutting: velocity diagram, virtual work equation, and upper bound theorem, International Journal of machine Tools and Manufacture 41 (2001)
393418.

1383

[10] D. Kececioglu, Shear strain rate in metal cutting and its effect
on shear flow stress, Transactions of American Society of Mechanical Engineers 80 (1958) 158.
[11] L. Dechiffre, in: Metal Cutting Mechanics and Applications,
Technical University of Denmark, Denmark, 1990, pp. 2638.
[12] J. Leopold, Mechanical and physical models of machining, in:
Nantes, 24-25 January, Proceedings of the Second CIRP Workshop on Modeling of Machining Operations, 1999.
[13] J.C. Hamann, V. Grolleau, F. Le Maitre, Machinability improvement of steel at high cutting speedsstudy of tool/work material
interaction, Annals of the CIRP 45 (1996) 8792.
[14] M.C. Shaw, Metal Cutting Principles, Oxford University Press,
Oxford, UK, 1984.
[15] G. Boothroyd, Fundamentals of Metal Machining and Machine
Tools, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co, 1975.
[16] K.J. Trigger, B.T. Chao, An analytical evaluation of metal cutting
temperature, Transactions of the ASME 73 (1951) 5768.