A PROCESS-MODEL BASED METHODOLOGY FOR

COMPREHENSIVE PROCESS PLANNING OF CONTOUR TURNING

OPERATIONS

Jingrong Lu, O. Burak Ozdoganlar,

Shiv G. Kapoor, Richard E. DeVor,
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, IL 61801-2906

ABSTRACT
This paper presents a model-based process planning methodology for contour turning operations. Its
strength lies in its ability to simulate process performance through the use of comprehensive mechanistic cutting process models that allows the planner to
deal more realistically with the parameter selection
problem. The methodology presented herein allows
the planner to examine the issues of variable cutting
forces, tool interference, and process stability along
the cutting path of a complex contour turning situation.
The parameter selection process includes the selection of cutting conditions and tool geometry, subject to
a set of pre-specified performance requirements, including the consideration of the groove tool and tool
wear. The stability line chart for contour turning stability analysis is introduced. A comprehensive case
study is conducted based on the machining of an automobile wheel rim contour.

INTRODUCTION
Once a suitable machining operation or a sequence of
machining operations is selected for a given process
planning scenario, cutting tools and cutting conditions
for each of the operations have to be chosen. The
tooling and the cutting conditions selected will have
a significant influence on the cycle time and the tool
Currently

with The Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA.

with Structural Dynamics Research Department,
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM.
Currently

wear/life, as well as on the quality of the surface finish

and the dimensional accuracy. In simultaneously considering productivity constraints (high material removal
rate, low machining and cycle times, decreased tooling costs, etc.) and design constraints (dimensional
tolerances, flatness requirements, surface roughness
limits, etc.), some form of machining process decision
support system is required.
There have been numerous approaches proposed to
deal with the machining condition selection problem.
Some of the optimization methods proposed use a single criterion objective function, such as the production
time, production cost (Jain et al., 1998), or profit rate
(Gupta et al., 1994). Naik and Dave (1998) proposed
a multi-criterion approach by combining the cost and
time objectives using the weighting coefficient method.
These methods use simple empirical formulae to determine machining performance and tend to focus on
the optimization techniques and algorithms. Generally, only very few parameters, cutting speed, feed
and/or depth of cut, are considered, while some very
important aspects, such as the tool-geometry selection, force variation, and process stability, are not accommodated. Further, these methods only deal with
simple machining processes, e. g., for the turning operation, only straight turning with a single pass (Armarego and Ostafiev, 2001) or multiple passes (Naik
and Dave, 1998) is considered.
Recently, Strenkowski and Wei (1997) have developed
a model-based approach to select parameters for the
end milling using microgenetic algorithms. In their
work, they considered both cutting conditions and tool

geometry parameters while emphasizing the use of

genetic algorithms in taking a more comprehensive
approach to machining optimization problems.
Since 1980, a wealth of knowledge in machining has
been obtained through the development of mechanistic models for machining processes. Based on a
set of process conditions, these models can provide
accurate prediction of the machining forces, surface
error, surface finish, and dynamic process stability.
Mechanistic models have been developed for complex
machining process including the dual-mechanism approach to predict machining forces in turning (Endres
et al., 1995), the mechanistic force model for contour
turning (Reddy et al., 2001), the cutting force model
for groove tooling (Zhu et al., 1999), the worn tool force
model (Smithey et al., 2001), the analytical stability solution for the turning process (Ozdoganlar and Endres,
1998), and the dynamic model for contour turning process (Reddy et al., 2001, 2002).
In process planning, the process planner has to solve
the inverse problem of finding optimal machining parameters for a particular machining operation, for given
part requirements and economical objectives (minimum cycle time, minimum production cost). Furthermore, the planner is required to handle more difficult but critical machining issues in the processplanning environment, namely, complicated cut geometry, variation of cutting force along the tool path,
tool/workpiece interference, tool wear, cutting force for
groove tooling, and cutting process stability.
In this paper, a process model-based planning
methodology has been developed to provide a process
planner with advice on the selection of machining conditions to best meet pre-stated process performance
requirements for complex contour turning operations.
Its strength lies in its ability to simulate the process
performance through the use of powerful mechanistic
process models that allow the planner to deal more
realistically with the parameter selection problem. A
further strength of this approach is its ability to take
the workpiece cut geometry, including the machining of contours, into account in the planning process.
The optimization engine, employing genetic algorithm
methods, selects cutting conditions based on an objective function and a set of constraints by exercising
the mechanistic models repeatedly to converge upon
the solution. The methodology further provides the
planner with important information concerning problems that may arise in terms of excessive forces, process instabilities, and tool/workpiece interference and
then allows the planner to develop alternative solutions
to overcome such problems.

PROPOSED MODEL-BASED METHODOLOGY

This section briefly describes the elements of the proposed methodology, including the process models,

stability analysis, optimization algorithm, and the overall step-by-step methodology.

Process Models
The methodology incorporates various machining process models developed in the last two decades. Each
of these models have undergone extensive validation
experiments. The reader is directed to the cited references for more information on model details and validation results.
The cutting forces are determined using the mechanistic model in which the cutting forces are proportional
to the chip area. The constants of proportionality (i.e.,
specific energies) are functions of the cutting speed,
chip thickness, and normal rake angle, and are determined by conducting a few calibration tests for a wide
range of cutting conditions for a given tool/workpiece
combination (Endres et al., 1995). An analytical solution derived in (Reddy et al., 2001) is used here to
determine the chip area.
Grooved tools are used in turning operations for better chip breakability, reduced forces, improved surface
finish and reduced tool wear. The cutting force model
for grooved tooling developed by Zhu et al. (1999) is
incorporated in the turning process model. This model
considers five groove parameters, and adds two parameters to the equations of flat-tool specific energies.
During machining, the tool geometry changes as a result of tool wear, which may have undesired effects,
such as increased cutting force and power consumption, and poor part accuracy. The worn-tool force
model developed by Smithey et al. (2001) is used here,
which calculates the additional forces arising due to
pre-specified wear-land width.
When the cutting forces are determined by the force
models described above, the power consumption can
be calculated based on the cutting force, cutting
speed and user input machine tool efficiency (me )
(Kalpakjian, 1995). The surface finish is calculated using the surface finish formula for the turning operation
based on the feed rate and nose radius of the tool.
The classic Taylor tool life equation (Kalpakjian, 1995)
is used to calculate the tool life, which is a function
of the cutting speed and two empirical coefficients for
each workpiece/tool material combination.

Stability Analysis
The stability analysis models developed by Ozdoganlar and Endres (1998) and Reddy et al. (2002) are employed to assess the stability of the turning process.
The stability lobe chart (depth of cut vs. Ispindle
speed), as shown in the Fig. 1(a), is commonly employed to assess the process stability. The process is
stable if the cutting conditions fall below the curves. In
Fig. 1(a), cutting conditions 1 and 3 are stable but 2
is unstable. Further, point 1 is absolutely stable, since

Depth of Cut (mm)

Belegundu and Chandrupatla (1999), and is given by

S=

3
Stable

1
0

800

1600

2400

3200

Fi =

1
0

1
0

800

1600

2400

3200

Spindle speed (rpm)

1. (a). STABILITY LOBE CHART, (b) STABILITY

LINE CHART
changes in speed do not affect stability, and point 3 is
conditionally stable.
It is also noted in the stability lobe chart of Fig. 1(a) that
if we draw a straight line through the depth of cut for
points 2 and 3, this line will have a pair of intersection
points with each stability lobe. If we only draw the lines
that connect each pair of intersection points for each
lobe, then the chart will appear as shown in Fig. 1(b),
which is defined here as the stability line chart. If a
point (process) is located on any segment of a line,
it is unstable, such as point 2; if it is located on any
gap between the segments of lines, it is conditionally
stable, such as point 3; and if there is no line through
its depth of cut, it is absolutely stable, such as point 1.
In the contour turning process, because the process
condition is changing along the entire contour, the
stability analysis requires generating the stability lobe
chart for each point (e.g., each workpiece revolution)
on the contour, which is time consuming. Further, if
these lobes are drawn on the same figure, it is cumbersome find a common stable operation condition
through the multiplicity of stability lobe charts. Since
the depth of cut in contour turning is usually determined by the workpiece geometry, it is not necessary
to generate the lobes over a range of depths of cut.
The stability line chart is especially convenient for determining and displaying the stability status of different
positions on the contour for the purpose of finding a
common stable operation condition.

Optimization Algorithm
The optimization engine, employing genetic algorithm
methods (Goldberg, 1989), selects cutting conditions
based on an objective function and set of constraints
by exercising the process models repeatedly to converge upon the solution. The objective function we
have adopted includes the performance constraints
using the weighting factor method, as described by

Pi

wi Bi ,

(1)

where wi is the weighting factor of the ith constraint

(objective), 0 wi 1. For each performance constraint i, for example cutting time, surface finish, etc.,
a pair of variables (Pi , Bi ) is defined as: if constraint
i is satisfied, Pi = 0 and Bi = Fi , where Fi , which is
non-dimensional, is given by

(b)

i

(a)

Depth of Cut (mm)

Unstable

|qcal (i) qconstr (i)|

,
qconstr (i)

(2)

where qcal is the quantity value of the performance

constraints, such as the cutting time, tool life, surface
finish, etc., calculated by the corresponding models
and qconstr is the constraint value of that quantity input
by the process planner. If constraint i is not satisfied,
Pi = N and Bi = 0, where N is a very large positive number (i.e., the punishment),
whose magnitude

is far larger than any possible i wi Bi value. The optimization is to minimize the value of S in Eq. (1). Each
performance constraint can be used individually or simultaneously as an objective in the optimization.

Step-by-Step Methodology
For a given contour geometry, the methodology is applied through the following steps;
1. Tool Interference Analysis: As the cutting tool
moves along the contour, there is a possibility that
the side and end cutting edges interfere with the workpiece. The first step is to conduct an interference analysis and to calculate the limits within which there is
no interference. Calculations lead to an upper bound
when the corner radius is set to zero.
2. Determination of equivalent straight turning cut
geometry: Due to the continuously changing chiparea geometry along the contour, simulating the contour turning process is time consuming, which prohibits a rapid optimization with multiple simulation runs
to be conducted. Instead, an equivalent straightturning geometry is established for the initial optimization. The equivalent cutting path length is selected as
the actual length of the contour, the equivalent radius
is set equal to the average radius of the workpiece,
and the equivalent depth of cut is taken as the average depth of cut.
3. Straight turning optimization: The straight turning
optimization is conducted on the equivalent straight
turning cut geometry to obtain the conditions for the
contour turning. First, the optimization is conducted
for the specified constraints and bounds to find the
optimized tool geometry. A standard tool with similar
geometry is then selected from a tool-supplier catalog, and the optimization is conducted again with these
(fixed) tool-geometry variables. If a viable solution that

satisfies all the constraints and variable bounds cannot be found with the selected tool, another tool with
similar geometry is tried.
4. Final interference check: The interference analysis is conducted again with the complete toolgeometry variables established at the previous step
and the insert size. If there is any interference, the
previous step must be repeated with a different tool
size and/or geometry until this final check is satisfied.
5. Contour turning simulation: The contour turning
simulation is then conducted using the optimized conditions. Both the resultant force and the stability information for each revolution along the contour is determined, and the values of the constraints are calculated.
6. Cutting force analysis: Depending on the contour
geometry, a large peak force is usually experienced
somewhere along the contour. This peak force generally violates the maximum power consumption constraint, and can result in tool breakage, excessive deflections, process instability and poor surface finish.
The peak force is detected and compared to the average force. Using the process knowledge, a reduced
feed rate is then calculated to eliminate the peak force.
The reduced feed rate is used only in the high-peak region.
7. Process stability analysis: Once the peak force
has been eliminated, a stability analysis is conducted
to check the process stability. The stability is evaluated at each revolution along the contour. The dynamic properties, i.e., the mass, stiffness, damping,
and mode orientation values, which could either be
different for each revolution (e.g., if the dynamics are
dominated by the workpiece/spindle), or be constant
for all revolutions (e.g., if the dynamics are dominated
the tooling/fixture), are supplied by the user. The stability line chart is then generated, and can be used
to stabilize the operation either by finding a constant
speed throughout the whole tool path, or by determining a speed only to be used within the unstable region.

STRAIGHT TURNING OPTIMIZATION AND

VALIDATION EXPERIMENTS
To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed
model-based methodology for turning operations, a
straight turning process is optimized, and the results
are experimentally validated.

Straight turning optimization

The workpiece material considered is aluminum 2024
(with 70 mm length of cut and 60.32 mm diameter) and
the tool material is TiN-coated carbide. It is assumed
that the machined diameter is 52.32 mm (i.e., a total of
4 mm depth of cut). The optimization is conducted for
both the roughing and finishing processes.

1. PARAMETER RANGES AND CONSTRAINTS.

Cutting conditions:

Roughing

Finishing

surface speed (m/min)

feed (mm/rev)
depth of cut (mm)

210 790
0.2 0.5
3 3.5

60 900
0.08 0.2
Fixed

Constraints:

Roughing

Finishing

< 0.20
> 45
< 0.1
< 10

< 0.30
> 45
< 0.02
< 10

cutting time (min)

tool life (min)
surface finish (mm)
max. power (hp)

Based on the analysis of machining optimization problems solved using the proposed methodology, the following genetic algorithm parameters are used for all
the examples in this paper: population size ps = 100,
total generation number Gn = 50, tournament selection size st = 2, crossover rate cr = 0.8, mutation rate
mr = 0.05. The performance constraints considered in
the optimization include: cutting time, tool life, surface
finish and power consumption. The preset constraint
values and the cutting condition ranges are given in
Table 1. The objective of both the roughing and finishing optimization is to minimize the cutting time, i.e., in
Eq. (1) only the weight wi for the cutting time is set to
unity, and all others are set to zero.
The optimization is conducted in three stages: In the
Roughing 1 (R1), the cutting conditions and tool geometry parameters are optimized. In the Roughing
2 (R2), a specific tooling with geometry parameters
close to those obtained in R1 is selected from a tool
supplier catalog (Kennametal, 1996), and the algorithm is re-executed to optimize the machining conditions with this tooling. In the Finishing (F), the same
tooling as that in R2 is used, the depth of cut is fixed to
that remaining from the roughing cut, and the cutting
speed and feed are optimized.
The data required by the machining process models for the straight turning optimization were obtained from separate calibration experiments. The tool
life data were obtained from the published literature
(Kalpakjian, 1995).
The optimization results are shown in Table 2, where f
denotes the fixed values. All of the pre-specified performance requirements (constraints) are satisfied. It
can be inferred that the solution is driven primarily by
the tool life, since it is the only constraint that borders
the preset constraint value (especially for R2).
After the optimization, a sensitivity analysis can be
conducted to evaluate the correlations between the
variables and constraints. For example, Fig. 2 shows
the feed/cutting time and feed/power consumption correlations after F. The broken line represents the feed
value after optimization. By analyzing the sensitivity graphs, the process planner can see how small
changes of the feed rate will affect the cutting time and
the power consumption.

2. OPTIMIZATION RESULTS FOR STRAIGHT

TURNING.
Optimized Variables:
surface speed (m/min)
feed (mm/rev)
depth of cut (mm)
back rake (deg)
side rake (deg)
side cutting edge (deg)
nose radius (mm)

R1

R2

Cutting Conditions:

Roughing

Finishing

248.2
0.45
3.397
1.38
2.07
3.56
0.858

256.3
0.50
3.113
3.5 f
3.5 f
5 f
0.8 f

249.2
0.197
0.887 f
3.5 f
3.5 f
5 f
0.8 f

surface speed (m/min)

feed (mm/rev)
depth of cut (mm)

256.3
0.50
3.113

249.2
0.197
0.887

0.118
0.030
1189.3
49.5
8.75

0.103
0.039
896.6
45.2
7.08

0.239
0.006
138.3
49.0
1.05

Constraints:

Cutting Time (min)

Power Consumption (hp)

cutting time (min)

surface finish (mm)
resultant force (N)
tool life (min)
max. power (hp)

Feed (mm/rev)

3. COMPARISON BETWEEN OPTIMIZED AND

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS.

Constraints:

Opt

Exp

Opt

Exp

cutting time (min)

surface finish (m)
resultant force (N)
tool life (min)
max. power (hp)

0.10
39
896
45.2
7.08

0.10
42
916
7.25

0.24
6
138
1.05

0.24
8
155
1.22

4. THE EFFECTS OF THE GROOVE TOOL AND

TOOL WEAR.
Cutg. Conditions:

R2

R2A

R2B

R2C

surf. speed (m/min)

feed (mm/rev)
depth of cut (mm)

256.3
0.50
3.113

254.6
0.49
3.175

255.9
0.50
3.315

254.9
0.49
3.102

0.103
0.039
45.2
896.6
7.08

0.106
0.038
46.1
770.8
5.98

0.104
0.039
45.4
1051.6
7.77

0.106
0.038
45.9
871.6
6.22

Constraints:

Feed (mm/rev)

cutting time (min)

surface finish (mm)
tool life (min)
resultant force (N)
max. power (hp)

2. GRAPHICAL SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Experimental Validation
The roughing and finishing experiments were conducted using the optimized cutting conditions of Table 2. A Mori Seiki ZL-250 CNC turning machine was
used. The forces were measured by a Kistler 9257A
3-component dynamometer. The Mitutoyo Contracer
CBH-400 (0.4m accuracy) was used to measure the
surface contour of machined workpiece. The optimized cutting conditions, the associated performance
results predicted by the models, and the experimental results are compared in Table 3, where Opt and
Exp denote the optimized and experimental results,
respectively. A good match between the predicted and
experimental values is seen.

Eects of Groove Tool and Tool Wear

To show the effect of the groove-tool and worn-tool
force models when included in the methodology, the
results of R2 in Table 2 (which uses a flat insert and
does not consider the tool wear effect) are compared
with those that include either the groove tooling or tool
wear, or both, in the optimization.
The data required by the groove-tool and worn-tool
force models were obtained from separate calibration
experiments according to procedures outlined in (Zhu
et al., 1999) and (Smithey et al., 2001), respectively.
The optimization results of the roughing operations
with the same tool geometry as that of R2 (the back

rake, side rake and side cutting edge angles, and

the nose radius) are given in Table 4 to compare the
groove tool and worn tool combinations. In R2A, a
grooved insert is selected from a tool-supplier catalog
(Sandvik, 1994) based on the current cutting conditions with no tool wear. In R2B, a flat tool with normal wear (0.35 mm wear-land width) is considered.
In R2C, both the groove-tool (same groove geometry
as in R2A) and the worn-tool (same parameters as in
R2B) effects are considered.
The results of R2A show that when groove insert is
used, the resultant force and maximum power consumption decrease as compared to those of R2. The
results of R2B show that the tool wear causes larger
resultant force and larger power consumption than in
R2. The results of R2C show that, under the combined
effects of groove tooling and tool wear, the resultant
force and power consumption are less than those in
R2, and fall between those of R2A and R2B.

CONTOUR TURNING METHODOLOGY AND

CASE STUDY
In the contour turning process, the cutting force, cutting velocity, depth of cut, and stability all vary along
the tool path. This complexity makes it difficult to find
a viable, much less an optimal, set of process parameters. When selecting machining parameters for the
contour turning, other than the productivity and the
production cost, at least three other issues must be

5. STRAIGHT TURNING OPTIMIZATION RESULTS.

3. THE CROSS-SECTION OF THE WHEEL.

Final Surface
(to be generated)

Cutting Conditions:

Step A

Step B

spindle speed (rpm)

feed (mm/rev)
depth of cut (mm)
back rake (deg)
side rake (deg)
side cutting edge (deg)
nose radius (mm)

3485
0.4
1.1 f
1.4
1.3
7.6
0.7

3495
0.39
1.1 f
0.0 f
0.0 f
5 f
0.8 f

0.039 S
30.6 S
0.029 S
49.35 S

0.04 S
30.5 S
0.024 S
48.57 S

Constraints:
cutting time (min) < 0.1
tool life (min) > 30
surface finish (mm) < 0.08
power consumption (hp) < 75

whereas the latter will be considered during the tool

selection from the catalog.

Uncut Surface

4. TOOL PATH FOR THE WHEEL RIM.

addressed: 1) the tool (geometry) selection to avoid interference; 2) the cutting force analysis to avoid harmful high peak forces; and 3) the process stability analysis to ensure a stable cutting process.
To show the capability of proposed methodology for
more complex turning processes, a contour turning
operation for an automotive wheel has been analyzed.
The part of the wheel profile considered in this case is
shown in Figs. 3 and 4.
The workpiece material is the cast aluminum alloy 356.
The contour on the rim portion of the wheel is to be
machined in the spindle speed range of 1500 4500
rpm (2000 m/min - 7000 m/min), and feed rate range
of 0.1 0.4 mm/rev. A PCD-tipped flat insert is selected. The data required by the machining process
models were obtained from separate experiments on
aluminum 356 using this tool. The tool life data were
obtained from the production data.
First, a contour geometry is entered using a G-code
type data format (see Fig. 4). In this case study,
the contour of the final machined surface and a constant/fixed depth of cut are entered. The step-by-step
methodology described above is then followed;
1. Tool Interference Analysis: The calculated results
indicate that, to avoid interference, a negative (< 0
deg) side cutting edge angle with an end cutting edge
angle larger than 17.6 deg should be used. The former limit will be imposed as a parameter range limit,

2. Determination of equivalent straight turning cut geometry: The equivalent straight turning cut geometry
is determined based on the input contour geometry.
The resulting equivalent cutting path length is 54.5 mm,
the equivalent radius is 225.3 mm, and the equivalent
depth of cut is 1.1 mm.
3. Straight turning optimization: The results of this twostep optimization are shown in Table 5, where (S) denotes that a constraint is satisfied.
The optimization results of Step A in Table 5 are used
as the initial conditions for the contour turning. The
spindle speed is 3495 rpm and the feed is 0.39 mm/rev.
Based on the optimization results for the tool geometry in Table 5 and the results of the tool interference
check, a tool is selected from a tool-supplier catalog
(Kennametal, 1996) with a 0 deg back rake angle, a 0
deg side rake angle, a 5 deg side cutting edge angle,
a 30 deg end cutting edge angle, and a 0.8 mm nose
radius. The optimization results with these parameters
are given in the column titled Step B.
4. Final interference check: Examination of an insert
with 15 mm cutting edge length and with the selected
geometry indicated no interference.
5. Contour turning simulation: The contour turning process is then simulated (Sim 1 in Table 6) by the system
using the conditions of Step B in Table 5. The results
of Sim 1 in Table 6 show that, by using the cutting conditions and tool geometry obtained from the straight
turning process, similar values of cutting time, tool life
and surface finish are obtained. However, there exists
a peak force that is higher than the imposed constraint.
6. Cutting force analysis: The high power consumption, which violates the constraint value, is likely
caused by the peak force, as shown in Fig. 5(a). This
peak is found in a narrow band about X = 10 mm,
which is located in the segment GH on Fig. 4. In
this example, the peak force (about 1340N) is over
two times higher than the average force (about 560N).

6. RESULTS OF SIMULATION 1-3.

Cutting Conditions:
spindle speed (rpm)
feed (mm/rev)

Z (mm)

Sim 1

Sim 2

Sim 3

3495
0.39
-

3495
0.39
0.16

4000
0.39
0.16

0.040
31.1
0.024
152.42
1347.6

0.046
31.1
0.024
63.24
577.3

0.041
25.6
0.024
72.00
573.1

225
231

X (mm)

(b)

237

5. FORCE DISTRIBUTION FOR (a) Sim 1 AND (b)

Sim 2.
Based on the current feed rate (0.39 mm/rev), a reduced feed rate (0.16 mm/rev) is calculated. This feed
rate will be used only on the segment GH.
The contour turning simulation is conducted again with
the varying feed (Sim 2 in Table 6). The new force distribution displayed in Fig. 5(b) confirms that the peak
force has been eliminated. The results of Sim 2, given
in Table 6, also show the maximum power consumption (63.24 hp) is below the constraint value (75 hp).
7. Process stability analysis: The stability analysis is
conducted for Sim 2. The modal parameters used
were a stiffness value of 1.63 107 N/m, a natural frequency of 198 Hz, a damping ratio of 0.05, and a mode
orientation of 60 deg. These dynamic parameters are
obtained from an impact hammer test on the workpiece, and assumed to be constant throughout the tool
path. In this case, there are total of 170 spindle revolutions on the entire contour. The analysis results indicate that there is an unstable region on the contour as
marked by the thick line in Fig. 6.
A tabulated stability check list is generated to classify
each revolution as either unstable, conditionally stable, or absolutely stable. The unstable region in Fig. 6
is seen to correspond to the revolutions from 115 to
128. It is also found that the revolutions from 111 to
114 are conditionally stable and all others are absolutely stable. The stability line chart is then generated
to display the conditionally stable and unstable revolutions, as shown in Fig. 7(a).
In the stability line chart of Fig. 7(a), the depth of cut
is the effective depth of cut calculated by the ratio of
the chip area to the feed for each revolution. The current cutting condition (3495 rpm) is marked in the fig-

10

20

30

40

6. GRAPHICAL STABILITY CHECK (Sim 2).

(a)

(b)

111

2.8

2.8

2.1

2.1
127
1.4

1.4
0.7

0.7
3495

0
0

X (mm)

X (mm)

Depth of Cut (mm)

Resultant Force (N)

(a)

Resultant Force (N)

Constraints:
cutting time (min) < 0.1
tool life (min) > 30
surf. finish (mm) < 0.08
max. power (hp) < 75
resultant force (N)

Unstable
Region

219

1100 2200 3300 4400

Spindle Speed (rpm)

3050

128
0
0

1100

2200

4000
3300

4400

Spindle Speed (rpm)

7. (a). STABILITY LINE CHART (111 TO 128) (Sim

2)., (b) STABILITY LINE CHART (112 TO 128)
(Sim 3).
ure. According to the stability line chart definition, the
common gaps between these line segments are stable
conditions. It can be seen that a spindle speed around
4000 rpm leads to a stable operation.
Using the 4000 rpm spindle speed along the entire contour, the contour turning simulation was rerun (Sim 3
in Table 6), and the stability analysis was repeated. It
is found that all the revolutions are stable. The stability
line chart for the conditionally stable check points are
shown in Fig. 7(b). The increased spindles speed of
Sim 3 caused the cutting time to reduce to 0.041 min,
and the tool life to decrease to 25.6 min, latter of which
violates the constraint (see Table 6).
To improve the situation for tool life, there are two possible options, defined by Sim 4 and Sim 5, as shown
in Table 7. In Sim 4, the spindle speed is increased
to 4000 rpm only in the unstable section (3495 rpm for
the rest). By doing so, the unstable area is eliminated
and the tool life is improved to 29.6 minutes as shown
in Table 7, which essentially satisfies the constraint (30
minutes). The cutting time is still below its preset constraint (0.1 minute).
By analyzing the stability line chart (Fig. 7(a)), it is
found there is another (narrow) common gap at a lower
spindle speed (3050 rpm). Since in Sim 4 the cutting
time is still well below the constraint value, reducing
the spindle speed may further improve the tool life.
The results of Sim 5 with 3050 rpm for the entire cut
are shown in Table 7. The lower speed used caused
the tool life to improve further (38.1 min), the cutting
time to increase (0.053 min), and the maximum power
consumption to decrease. But in the stability line chart
Fig. 7(a), there exists two unstable revolutions (127

7. RESULTS OF SIMULATION 4 AND 5

Cutting Conditions:
spindle speed (rpm)
feed (mm/rev)

Sim 4

Sim 5

3495
4000
0.39
0.16

3050
0.39
0.16

0.046
29.6
0.024
68.05
577.3

0.053
38.1
0.024
55.47
581.5

Constraints:
cutting time (min) < 0.1
tool life (min) > 30
surface finish (mm) < 0.08
max. power (hp) < 75
resultant force (N)

chining forces, part 1: Model development, and part

2: Calibration and validation, ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry Vol. 117(4), pp. 526-541.
Jain, P. K., Mehta, N. K., and Pandey, P. C., (1998),
Automatic cut planning in an operative process planning system, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B-Journal of Engineering
Manufacture, Vol. 212(B2), pp. 129-140.
Goldberg, E., (1989), Genetic Algorithms In Search,
Optimization, And Machine Learning, AddisonWesley, Inc.

and 128). Since the unstable region lasts for only two
revolutions, it is unlikely to have an adverse effect.

Gupta, R., Batra, J. L., and Lal, G. K., (1994),

Profit rate maximization in multipass turning with constraints: a geometric programming approach, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 32(7),
pp. 1557-1569.

CONCLUSIONS

Kalpakjian S., (1995), Manufacturing Engineering and

Technology, third edition, Adison-Wesley, Inc.

A model based process planning methodology for contour turning operations has been presented. Specific
conclusions of this work are: (1) The model based
methodology is capable of including more sophisticated machining process models and provides a process planner with advice on the selection of machining conditions to best meet pre-stated process performance requirements. (2) The methodology is able to
handle more difficult but critical machining issues in a
process planning environment that may arise from the
solution in terms of excessive forces, process instabilities, and tool/workpiece interference and then allows
the planner, to develop alternative solutions to overcome such problems. (3) The contour turning methodology has been proposed and effectively applied in the
contour turning case study. (4) The stability line chart
is introduced and shown to be useful for the stability
analysis of the contour turning process.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the University of Illinois NSF Industry/University
Center for Machine-Tool Systems Research.

Kennametal Lathe Tooling Catalog 6000, (1996), Kennametal Inc., pp.261-263.

Naik, D. B. and Dave, A. K., (1998), Multipass, multicriterion optimization in turning, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14(8),
pp. 544-548.
Ozdoganlar, O. B., and Endres, W. J., (1998), An analytical stability solution for the turning process with
depth-direction dynamics and corner-radiused tooling, Proc. of ASME/IMECE98, Vol. DCS-64, pp. 511518.
Reddy, R. G., Kapoor, S. G., and DeVor, R. E., (2001),
A mechanistic force model for contour turning, ASME
J. Mfg. Sci. and Engg., Vol 122(3), pp. 1551-1572.
Reddy, R. G., Ozdoganlar, O. B., Kapoor, S. G., DeVor, R. E., and Liu, X., (2002), A Stability Solution for
the Axial Contour-Turning Process, ASME J. Mfg. Sci.
and Engg., Vol. 124, pp. 581-587.
Sandvik Turning Tools and Inserts Catalog, CMP94-T,
(1994), Sandvik Coromant Company, pp. 74-76.

REFERENCES

Smithey, D. W., Kapoor, S. G., and DeVor, R. E.,

(2001), A new mechanistic model for predicting worn
tool cutting forces, Machining Science and Technology, Vol. 5(1), pp. 23-42.

Armarego, E. J .A. and Ostafiev, D., (2001), Multiconstraint optimization analysis and simulation of single pass turning with modern chip breaker tools,
Transactions of NAMRI/SME, Vol. XXIX, pp. 335-342.

Strenkowski, J. S., and Wei, Y., (1997), Optimal selection of tooling and cutting conditions for end milling using microgenetic algorithms, Manufacturing Science
and Technology, Vol. 2, pp. 253-260.

Belegundu, A. D. and Chandrupatla, T. R., (1999), Optimization Concepts and Applications in Engineering,
Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Zhu, R., (1997), Mechanistic force model for grooved

tools in orthogonal machining, M.S. Thesis, The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Endres, W. J., DeVor, R. E., and Kapoor, S. G., (1995),

A dual-mechanism approach to the prediction of ma-