Submitted by Under the guidance of

Arpit Kumar Agrawal Prof. A. K. Nath

(11MF3IM03)

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
Mechanism of Laser Cutting

 Absorption of laser beam at material surface

 Melting and partial vaporization by laser heating

 Melt ejection by coaxial gas jet

(a)
Types of assist gas

Active gas Inert or inactive gas

(O2) (N2, Ar, He)

(b)
Advantageous for Interaction of laser beam with material;
ferrous materials (a) optical energy transfer, (b) mass and
momentum transfer [1] 2
Dominant laser sources for metal cutting

CO2 Laser Fiber or Disk Laser

(10.6 µm) (~1 µm)

High power capacity Higher efficiency

Better beam quality

Better absorptivity for a
wide range of material
High focusability

Most industrially used laser Beam guidance

Reliable alternative to CO2 laser

3
Limitation of Fiber or Disk laser

F
I  Lower kerf-width Uncontrolled material
B removal at bottom for
E Tight focusing  Higher restriction on the thick section
R gas flow through kerf

o
r

D Absorption Unfavorable incidence angle

I Absorptivity of molten
characteristics for thick sheet Iron
S
K

Absorptivity
Zero
inclination
L Cut direction
A
Angle of Incidence
S (Φin)
E Work-piece
Angle of Incidence
R
Average Φin for thick section ≥ 86o[7]

4
Limitation of Fiber or Disk laser

F
I  Lower kerf-width Uncontrolled material
B removal at bottom for
E Tight focusing  Higher restriction on the thick section
R gas flow through kerf

o Inefficient for
r
cutting thick sheet
> 3–4 mm
D Absorption Unfavorable incidence angle
I Absorptivity of molten
characteristics for thick sheet Iron
S
K

Absorptivity
Zero
inclination
L Cut direction
A
Angle of Incidence
S (Φin)
E Work-piece
Angle of Incidence
R
Average Φin for thick section ≥ 86o[7]

5
Way to improve quality with Fiber laser: 1st approach

1 Change in focal point location without changing SOD

 Shift of focal point towards bottom

 Higher kerf-width & better flow inside kerf
Nozzle

 Constant Stand-off distance (SOD)

Laser beam

SOD

Work-piece

Focused at top Focused near Focused at

to middle bottom

6
Different quality factors

1 Ratio of bottom to top kerf-width wt

Ratio = wb/wt
Objective: Minimize the “kerf ratio”

wb
2 Striation depth

Zone 1 Striation depth: Length of Zone 1+2

Zone 1: Partial vaporization and melt blow

Zone 2
Zone 2: Material removal by melt ejection
Zone 3 Zone 3: Uncontrolled removal of melt layer

Objective: Maximize the “striation depth”

7
Optimum quality for three focusing conditions
Focusing at top Focusing at 2.5 mm below top Focusing at bottom

Kerf ratio: 2.46 Kerf ratio: 1.80 Kerf ratio: 1.27

Striation depth: 2.09 mm Striation depth: 2.63 mm Striation depth: 3.13 mm

Shift of focal point towards bottom

 Enlargement of kerf-width
 Stable gas flow for longer depth
 More uniform removal of melt layer 8
Way to improve cut quality: 2nd approach
Zero
2 Change in Laser Incidence angle inclination

Negative
inclination Positive
inclination
 Positive inclination: Lower angle of incidence Cut direction

 Negative inclination: Higher angle of incidence Angle of Incidence

Work-piece

Zero inclination Positive inclination Negative inclination

Laser beam

Work-piece Work-piece Work-piece

9
Effect of Incidence angle: preliminary work
Nozzle 1 Nozzle 2 Nozzle 3
Nozzle Nozzle 1 Nozzle 2 Nozzle 3
6
Raatio of bottom to top kerf-

Power (W) 1315 1210 1150

Cut speed (mm/min) 2500
4 Gas pressure (bar) 4.0
width

SOD (mm) 1.0

2
Nozzle 1 Nozzle 2 Nozzle 3
3.5

Striation depth (mm)

0
-8 -4 0 4 8

Inclination angle (O)

2.5
 Improvement in both the direction
 Best quality for bottom focusing
 Slight deterioration at high negative angle 1.5
 Higher transmission loss -8 -4 0 4 8
 Negligible effect at middle focusing Inclination angle (O)

Work presented at 38th International MATADOR Conference at Taiwan, 2015 10

 Objective

 Effect of laser incidence angle on cut quality of thick steel sheet

 Inclination towards the cut front

 Inclination away from the cut front

 Study within a wide range of process parameters (changing the cutting speed
and gas pressure along with the angle)

 Optimum cut quality and its comparison with the best quality obtained at zero
inclination

 Laser used: Yb-Fiber laser with 1.07 µm wavelength

 Assist gas used: Oxygen
 Material: 4 mm thick AISI 304 stainless steel

11
Effect of inclination angle: Method used

Design of experiments Study of:

 Effect of process parameters on
Response Surface  Cut quality
Methodology  Material removal mechanism
 Optimum cut quality for both inclinations

Box-Behnken Design

Process parameter Code Positive inclination Negative inclination

Levels Level
-1 0 +1 -1 0 +1
Inclination angle (degree) A 0 2.77 5.54 -5.34 -2.37 0
Cutting speed (mm/min) B 1200 1700 2200 1200 1700 2200
Gas pressure (bar) C 2.0 3.5 5.0 2.0 3.5 5.0
Laser power (Watt) 1100
SOD (mm) 1.0
12
 Experiment runs: Positive Inclination Angle
Std Run Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Response: 1 Response: 2
No. A: Inclination A: Cutting speed A: Gas pr. Kerf ratio Striation
angle (o) (mm/min) (bar) depth (mm)

17 1 2.77 1700.00 3.50 2.53 2.55

13 2 2.77 1700.00 3.50 2.18 2.54
Note:
12 3 2.77 2200.00 5.00 1.34 2.74
 No. of repetition: 2
6 4 5.54 1700.00 2.00 1.99 2.25
10 5 2.77 2200.00 2.00 3.02 2.37
14 6 2.77 1700.00 3.50 2.35 2.37  Kerf ratio: average of 4
4 7 2.54 2200.00 3.50 1.45 2.55 readings
8 8 5.54 1700.00 5.00 1.33 2.89
5 9 0.00 1700.00 2.00 2.65 2.01  Striation depth: average
9 10 2.77 1200.00 2.00 2.66 1.97 of 24 readings
2 11 5.54 1200.00 3.50 1.86 2.60
7 12 0.00 1700.00 5.00 1.69 2.85
 Photographs taken using
3 13 0.00 2200.00 3.50 1.63 2.58
zoom microscope
15 14 2.77 1700.00 3.50 2.33 2.34
1 15 0.00 1200.00 3.50 2.65 2.13
16 16 2.77 1700.00 3.50 2.48 2.45
11 17 2.77 1200.00 5.00 2.39 2.70 13
 Kerf-ratio Striation depth
Source F-value P-value Significance Source F-value P-value Significance
Model 37.76 < 0.0001 Significant Model 37.76 < 0.0001 Significant

A 27.16 0.0004 A 27.16 0.0004

B 30.83 0.0002 B 30.83 0.0002

C 87.42 < 0.0001 C 87.42 < 0.0001

AB 5.10 0.0474 AB 5.10 0.0474

BC 27.27 0.0004 BC 27.27 0.0004

A2 48.79 < 0.0001 Lack of 0.94 0.5414 Non-

fit significant
Lack of 0.94 0.5414 Non-significant
fit R2 Adj. R2 Pred. R2 Adqt. Precision
0.9345 0.9048 0.8619 18.875
R2 Adj. R2 Pred. R2 Adqt. Precision
0.9577 0.9324 0.8389 19.474

Regression model: coded value

Kerf-ratio = 2.36 – 0.25×A – 0.26×B – 0.45×C + 0.15×AB – 0.35×BC – 0.46×A2

Striation depth = 2.46 + 0.09×A + 0.11×B + 0.32×C – 0.13×AB – 0.09×BC

14
 Experiment runs: Negative Inclination Angle
Std Run Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Response: 1 Response: 2
No. A: Inclination A: Cutting speed A: Gas pr. Kerf ratio Striation
angle (o) (mm/min) (bar) depth (mm)

14 1 - 2.67 1700.00 3.50 2.45 2.42

13 2 - 2.67 1700.00 3.50 2.96 2.31
Note:
9 3 - 2.67 1200.00 2.00 3.08 1.70
 No. of repetition: 2
6 4 0.00 1700.00 2.00 2.35 1.91
17 5 - 2.67 1700.00 3.50 2.49 2.47
12 6 - 2.67 2200.00 5.00 2.06 2.57  Kerf ratio: average of 4
5 7 - 5.34 1700.00 2.00 2.05 2.12 readings
3 8 - 5.34 2200.00 3.50 1.40 2.56
15 9 - 2.67 1700.00 3.50 2.60 2.33  Striation depth: average
1 10 - 5.34 1200.00 3.50 2.31 2.28 of 24 readings
7 11 - 5.34 1700.00 5.00 2.01 2.75
11 12 - 2.67 1200.00 5.00 2.62 2.48
 Photographs taken using
4 13 0.00 2200.00 3.50 1.74 2.50
zoom microscope
10 14 - 2.67 2200.00 2.00 2.52 2.27
16 15 - 2.67 1700.00 3.50 2.74 2.31
8 16 0.00 1700.00 5.00 2.12 2.52
2 17 0.00 1200.00 3.50 2.64 2.16 15
 Kerf-ratio Striation depth
Source F-value P-value Significance Source F-value P-value Significance
Model 23.06 < 0.0001 Significant Model 49.35 < 0.0001 Significant

A 5.15 0.0425 A 11.72 0.0057

B 37.89 < 0.0001 B 49.95 < 0.0001

C 6.25 0.0279 C 164.08 < 0.0001

A2 42.94 < 0.0001 BC 14.05 0.0032

Lack of 0.49 0.8211 Non-significant A2 6.98 0.0229

fit
Lack of 0.58 0.7522 Non-
R2 Adj. R2 Pred. R2 Adqt. Precision fit significant
0.8849 0.8465 0.7858 17.007
R2 Adj. R2 Pred. R2 Adqt. Precision
0.9573 0.9379 0.8903 24.643

Regression model: coded value

Kerf-ratio = 2.61 + 0.14×A – 0.37×B – 0.15×C – 0.54×A2

Striation depth = 2..37 – 0.077×A + 0.16×B + 0.29×C – 0.12×BC – 0.082×C2

16
Confirmation runs
Factors Responses
Mode of Exp. A B C Values Striation
operation no. Kerf ratio
(o) (mm/min) (bar) Depth (mm)
Experimental 2.69 2.17
1 1.38 1500 3.0
Positive Inclination

Predicted 2.61225 2.23236

Error % 2.89 2.87
Experimental 1.98 2.56
2 1.38 2000 4.0 Predicted 1.94973 2.60909
Error % 1.53 1.92
Experimental 2.12 2.55
3 4.15 1500 4.0 Predicted 2.10066 2.61136
Error % 0.91 2.41
Experimental 2.67 2.10
Negative Inclination

1 -1.33 1500 3.0 Predicted 2.74221 2.14752

Error % 2.70 2.26
Experimental 2.68 2.31
2 -1.33 1500 4.0 Predicted 2.64304 2.37286
Error % 1.38 2.72
Experimental 2.22 2.47
3 -1.33 2000 4.0 Predicted 2.27679 2.49286
Error % 2.56 1.14

17
Perturbation Graph: Kerf-width Ratio

Positive inclination Negative inclination

3.0 3.0

2.8 2.8

2.6
2.6
Kerf ratio

Kerf ratio
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.0
A: Inclination angle 2.0 A: Inclination angle
1.8 B: Cutting speed B: Cutting speed
1.6
C: Gas pressure 1.8 C: Gas pressure

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000
(a) (b)
Deviation from reference point (coded units) Deviation from reference point (coded units)

18
Perturbation Graph: Striation Depth

Positive inclination Negative inclination

2.8
2.8 2.6

2.7
2.7 2.5
Striation depth (mm)

Striation depth (mm)

2.6
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.3
A: Inclination angle A: Inclination angle
2.2
2.2 B: Cutting speed 2.1 B: Cutting speed
C: Gas pressure C: Gas pressure
2.1
2.1 2.0

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000
(a) (b)
Deviation from reference point (coded units) Deviation from reference point (coded units)

19
Effect of Incidence angle on cut quality
Gas flow line Zero inclination
Positive inclination
Zero inclination Negative
inclination Positive inclination
Laser beam
2 Cut direction

Angle of Incidence
Work-piece Work-piece
Work-piece

Lower angle of incidence Negative inclination

Better absorption characteristics
Higher beam interaction
Absorptivity of molten Iron

2 Work-piece
Absorptivity

3
3

Higher angle of incidence

Poor absorption characteristics
Angle of Incidence Higher transmission loss 20
Effect of Incidence angle on cut quality
Gas flow line
Positive inclination Negative inclination
Zero inclination
Laser beam

Work-piece Work-piece Work-piece

Force More axial

More radial
components components
components

Positive inclination

More radial force component: unsteady flow Negative inclination

Chance of uncontrolled material removal
Large axial component: more likely shearing
Smooth & more uniform removal of melt layer
21
Effect of Incidence angle on cut quality
Zero inclination Positive inclination Negative inclination

Laser beam

Work-piece

Positive inclination

More uniform intensity distribution Negative inclination

Higher non-uniformity in intensity distribution

22
Effect of Incidence angle on cut quality

Positive inclination
 Lower transmission loss
 Higher uniformity in intensity distribution
 Better absorption characteristics
 Impinging force on molten pool
Work-piece

2
Negative inclination
3

 Force on melt pool: more likely shearing Work-piece

 Lower interaction of laser and material
 Poor absorption characteristics
 More non-uniform intensity distribution

23
Perturbation Graph: Kerf-width Ratio

Positive inclination Negative inclination

3.0 3.0

2.8 2.8

2.6
2.6
Kerf ratio

Kerf ratio
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.0
A: Inclination angle 2.0 A: Inclination angle
1.8 B: Cutting speed B: Cutting speed
1.6
C: Gas pressure 1.8 C: Gas pressure

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000
(a) (b)
Deviation from reference point (coded units) Deviation from reference point (coded units)

24
Perturbation Graph: Striation Depth

Positive inclination Negative inclination

2.8
2.8 2.6

2.7
2.7 2.5
Striation depth (mm)

Striation depth (mm)

2.6
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.3
A: Inclination angle A: Inclination angle
2.2
2.2 B: Cutting speed 2.1 B: Cutting speed
C: Gas pressure C: Gas pressure
2.1
2.1 2.0

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000
(a) (b)
Deviation from reference point (coded units) Deviation from reference point (coded units)

25
Effect of Cutting Speed

Increase in
Cutting Speed Focused at
Focused near
top
to middle
Decreases
energy • Decrease in Line Energy
coupling Reduction in both
the kerf
Temperature at
bottom surface
decreases

reduction in melt layer

thickness
Higher reduction
Less at bottom
uncontrolled
removal at
bottom

Decrease in Kerf-width
ratio and Increase in
Striation depth
26
Perturbation Graph: Kerf-width Ratio

Positive inclination Negative inclination

3.0 3.0

2.8 2.8

2.6
2.6
Kerf ratio

Kerf ratio
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.0
A: Inclination angle 2.0 A: Inclination angle
1.8 B: Cutting speed B: Cutting speed
1.6
C: Gas pressure 1.8 C: Gas pressure

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000
(a) (b)
Deviation from reference point (coded units) Deviation from reference point (coded units)

27
Perturbation Graph: Striation Depth

Positive inclination Negative inclination

2.8
2.8 2.6

2.7
2.7 2.5
Striation depth (mm)

Striation depth (mm)

2.6
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.3
A: Inclination angle A: Inclination angle
2.2
2.2 B: Cutting speed 2.1 B: Cutting speed
C: Gas pressure C: Gas pressure
2.1
2.1 2.0

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000
(a) (b)
Deviation from reference point (coded units) Deviation from reference point (coded units)

28
 Effect of Gas Pressure

Increase in Gas
Pressure Focused at
Focused near
top
to middle

Turbulent Flow Oxidation at the Cooling

Shear Force
Characteristics metal surface Characteristics

• Kerf width is • Amount of O2 • Increase in shear • Gas flow line

more than 530 increases force; increases towards bottom
microns • Thus, Oxidation both top and kerf
• Turbulent also increases bottom kerf • Higher cooling at
characteristics is • Both top and high gas flow
insignificant in bottom kerf • Lower degree of
case of middle increase melting
focusing • Less uncontrolled
removal at bottom
Lower increase in bottom kerf: reduction in kerf ratio
More uniform melt removal: increase in striation depth 29
Perturbation Graph: Kerf-width Ratio

Positive inclination Negative inclination

3.0 3.0

2.8 2.8

2.6
2.6
Kerf ratio

Kerf ratio
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.0
A: Inclination angle 2.0 A: Inclination angle
1.8 B: Cutting speed B: Cutting speed
1.6
C: Gas pressure 1.8 C: Gas pressure

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000
(a) (b)
Deviation from reference point (coded units) Deviation from reference point (coded units)

30
Perturbation Graph: Striation Depth

Positive inclination Negative inclination

2.8
2.8 2.6

2.7
2.7 2.5
Striation depth (mm)

Striation depth (mm)

2.6
2.6
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.3
A: Inclination angle A: Inclination angle
2.2
2.2 B: Cutting speed 2.1 B: Cutting speed
C: Gas pressure C: Gas pressure
2.1
2.1 2.0

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 -1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000
(a) (b)
Deviation from reference point (coded units) Deviation from reference point (coded units)

31
Optimum parameters and cut quality

 Positive Inclination Angle

Sl Angle Cutting speed Gas pressure Kerf ratio Striation depth
No. (o) (mm/min) (bar) (mm)
1 5.54 1700 5 1.33 2.89
2 5.54 1815 5 1.26 2.85
3 5.54 2000 5 1.26 2.80

 Negative Inclination Angle

Sl Angle Cutting speed Gas pressure Kerf ratio Striation depth
No. (o) (mm/min) (bar) (mm)
1 -5.34 2200 5 1.38 2.65

32
Optimization quality at different inclinations

Inclination angle: - 5.34o Inclination angle: 0.00o Inclination angle: 5.54o

Kerf ratio: 1.38 Kerf ratio: 1.80 Kerf ratio: 1.33

Striation depth : 2.65 mm Striation depth : 2.63 mm Striation depth: 2.89 mm

Focal point position: 2.5 mm below the surface

33
Conclusions
 Improvement in both the inclination: towards and away from the cut
front

 Slight less improvement in negative inclination

 Higher transmission loss

 Percentage improvement in the kerf ratio:

 30% for positive
 10% for negative

 Percentage improvement in the striation depth:

 25% for positive
 2% for negative

34
Future scope

 Best quality for bottom focusing

 Individual effect of different phenomena which affect the cut quality

 The same study for cutting with inert gas, like nitrogen or argon

35
Acknowledgement
Special thanks to

Prof. S. Paul, technical staffs and research scholars of Machine tools and Machining
laboratory

Mr. Arup Ratan Kar and other staffs of the Central Workshop and Instrument Service
Section for the fabrication of different components

36
References
1. Steen WM, Mazumder J (2010) Laser Material Processing, Springer-Verlag, London, fourth edition, 156–161.
2. L. D. Scintilla, L. Tricarico, Experimental investigation on fiber and CO2 inert gas fusion cutting of AZ31
magnesium alloy sheets, Journal of Optics and laser technology.
3. L. D. Scintilla, L. Tricarico, A. Wetzig, A. Mahrle, E. Beyer, Primary losses in disk and CO2 laser beam inert gas
fusion cutting, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 211 (2011) 2050– 2061
4. C. Karatas, O. Keles, I. Uslan, Y. Usta, Laser cutting of steel sheets: Influence of workpiece thickness and beam
waist position on kerf size and stria formation, Journal of Journal of Materials Processing Technology 172
(2006) 22–29
5. J. Powell, S.O. Al-Mashikhi, A.F.H. Kaplan, K.T. Voisey, Fibre laser cutting of thin section mild steel: An
explanation of the ‘striation free’ effect, Journal of Optics and Lasers in Engineering 49 (2011)
6. B.S. Yilbas, Laser cutting of thick sheet metals: Effects of cutting parameters on kerf size variations (2008)
7. C. Wandera, A. Salminen, V. Kujanpaa, Inert gas cutting of thick-section stainless steel and medium-section
aluminum using a high power fiber laser, Journal of Laser Applications, 21: 3 (2009)
8. A. Mahrle, E. Beyer, Theoretical aspects of fiber laser cutting, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 42 (2009)
9. K. Hirano, R. Fabbro, Experimental investigation of hydrodynamics of melt layer during laser cutting of steel,
Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 44 (2011)
10. B Tirumala Rao, A K Nath, Melt flow characteristics in gas-assisted laser cutting, Sadhana, 27:5 (2002) 569 –
575
11. S Mullick, S Shrawgi, A Kangale, A Agrawal, A K Nath, Study on the effect of focal point location and laser
beam incident angle on the cut quality of thick stainless steel by Yb- Fiber laser

37