IME 241 Manufacturing Processes Laboratory

Revised October, 2007

LABORATORY REPORT WRITING

Skill in effective report writing is important to the professional life of engineers.

Reports should be clearly and concisely written to direct the reader's attention to the major

points in an experiment. Organization, good grammar, and overall neatness are the essential

ingredients of an effective report.

An engineering report is typically divided into the following sections:

(a) TITLE PAGE - including experiment name, name(s) of engineer(s), date

experiment completed, and date reported.

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS - with page numbers

(c) OBJECTIVE - the goal of the experiment with a brief explanation of any

necessary background theory and a justification for the experiment if necessary.

(d) PROCEDURE - including special equipment and instrument diagrams where

necessary.

(e) DATA, PRINT-OUTS, OBSERVATIONS GATHERED - Note: Tabulated

data and observations, where appropriate, are easier to read than "listed" data.

(f) ANALYSIS/MANIPULATION OF DATA - Equations, plots, etc.

(g) GENERAL DISCUSSION OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS - Refer to the

Raw Data, Analyzed Data, and any other "qualitative" results. Try not to draw

conclusions in this section- save them for the "OVERALL CONCLUSIONS"

section. Here, comment on the significance of the results and on the existing

theory which supports the results. If existing theory does not support or

address the results, comment on reasons why. For experimental work on the

"leading edge" of technology, try to identify and develop, if possible, some of

the theory necessary for proper discussion of the experimental results.

(h) OVERALL CONCLUSIONS - Address the objective here - i.e., was the

objective met?
 (i) APPENDIX - for large volumes of data, computer programs, and the like.

(j) BIBLIOGRAPHY/REFERENCE LIST - Number the list and use the numbers

as references in the body of the report. The reference number follows the text

and is enclosed in brackets - e.g." [5] after some text in one's report would

indicate that the preceding text was based on or quoted from reference number

five found in the reference list.

The appearance of the report is very important. The text of the report should be

typewritten (double-spaced) on plain, white paper (no lines). Data, plots, calculations, and
illustrations may be neatly handwritten and/or drawn on appropriate paper (white, column

(DATAFORM), or graph). Finally, the entire report should be bound in an appropriate report

cover.
 GENERAL SAFETY PRECAUTIONS
& RULES FOR CLEAN-UP

1. Keep your mind on your work; watch the tool; and shut off the machine if in doubt as
to the operation.

2. Wear safety glasses at all times in the Laboratory.

3. PROPER FOOTWEAR IS REQUIRED. No sneakers or open toe shoes allowed in

the Laboratory.

4. Do not wear loose clothing, ties, watches, rings, or other articles which can become
entangled in moving machinery. Long hair must be secured with a hair net or elastic
band. Shorts are not allowed in warm weather.

5. DO NOT LEAVE THE MACHINE WHEN IT IS RUNNING.

6. Do not lean across a moving cutter or table. Stop the machine to make all
adjustments.

7. Keep the fingers away from the tool and work while the machine is running.

8. Do not point and operate any air hose at a student in the Laboratories.

9. All tools and instruction material must be returned to their proper places.

10. All machinery MUST BE CLEANED and chips disposed of in trash can.
EVALUATION OF SURFACE FINISH MP1

1. OBJECTIVE

To study the effects which variations in the parameters of the primary machining

process of turning have on the surface finish of a workpiece.

2. EQUIPMENT

Federal Products Surfanalyzer, carbide cutting tool insert mounted on shank, Logan

Engine Lathe, mild steel workpiece, hand tachometer, and safety glasses.

3. DISCUSSION

Primary machining uses heavy roughing cuts to remove large amounts of material.

Secondary machining follows primary machining taking lighter cuts to improve surface finish

and dimensional accuracy. The allowable surface roughness of a part to be machined depends

on factors such as functions and size of the part, fit and dimensional accuracy required,

loading requirements, and required motion and wear characteristics.

Surface roughness can be measured by using a profilometer (Federal Products

Surfanalyzer) which uses a diamond tracer similar to a phonographic pickup. The tracer

reciprocates over the surface at a speed of about 1/8" per second and generates a voltage

which is proportional to the surface irregularities and is calibrated to express the arithmetic

average value in micro-inch or micro-meter.

In most cases the character of a machined surface depends upon the process used to

produce it. For example, there are several sources of roughness when machining with a single

point tool: (1) feed marks left by the cutting tool; (2) built-up edge fragments embedded in

the surface during the process of chip formation; (3) chatter marks from vibration of the tool,

workpiece, or machine tool itself. When a surface is turned at high speed without chatter

present, the primary surface roughness lies in an axial direction and may be computed quite
accurately from the feed and the tool geometry. (According to the American Standards

Association, ASA, the average roughness expressed in micro-inches for a turned surface is

approximately equal to feed/60.)

4. PROCEDURE

1. Understand the operating instructions for the lathe as presented to you by the

instructor.

2. Observe the cutting edge of the carbide insert under a microscope to assure

that the cutting edge is free from flaws and defects.

3. Divide the surface of the workpiece into nine 1.5" segments. Machine these

segments at the various combinations of feeds (0.004, 0.007, 0.010 ipr) and

speeds (150, 300, 450 sfpm), using a constant .020 inch depth of cut.

4. After turning the surface of the given workpiece, clean off the workpiece (i.e.,

remove chips and oil from it) measure the surface roughness of the workpiece

using the portable surface analyzer. Take four readings for each segment by

rotating the workpiece 90 after each reading.

Record all data on the "Data Sheet" below.

Calculate the average surface roughness.

 DATA SHEET FOR SURFACE FINISH EVALUATION

Cutting SurfaceRoughness(in.) Average

Feed
Speed Roughness
(ipr) 1 2 3 4
(sfpm) (in.)
0.004
150 0.007
0.10
0.004
300 0.007
0.10
0.004
450 0.007
0.10

5. EVALUATION

1. On one sheet of graph paper, plot the average surface roughness versus cutting

speed using feed as a parameter.

2. On another sheet of graph paper, plot the average surface roughness versus

feed using speed as a parameter.

Discuss your results and the effects of any observed built-up-edge, chatter, etc. on the

average surface roughness.

BAR DRAWING MP2

1. OBJECTIVE

To compare the work required per unit volume in the bar drawing process to the work

required per unit volume in the simple tension test to achieve the same extension of the bar

and from this determine the redundant work factor for the bar drawing.

2. EQUIPMENT

Tensile testing machine with a load capacity of 10,000lb. Hydraulic draw bench, fitted with

a load cell and dies for various finished bar diameters.

3. DISCUSSION

A perfectly efficient method of extending a cylindrical bar and decreasing its diameter is

through the application of simple tension. The disadvantage of this method is that about 25

percent elongation of the specimen will result in fracture. In contrast, bar drawing can be

performed over and over again, with smaller and smaller dies, to produce long lengths of bar,

rod and wire.

The efficiency of a bar drawing operation can be measured by comparing the work done

per unit volume (W/V) with the work per unit volume which would have been expended if the

process was as efficient as simple tension. The measure of efficiency is the redundant work

factor , which satisfies the equation:

W/V = (W/V)st

where W/V=actual work per unit volume expended in the process

 (W/V)st = work per unit volume expended in simple tension

= redundant work factor

The purpose of this lab is to compare the work required per unit volume in simple tension

to achieve the same extension of the bar. To accomplish this goal a bar is pulled in simple

tension and three bars are drawn through different diameter dies. From the force and

extension data taken in the simple tension test an expression relating the strain of the bar ()

to the work done per unit volume (W/V)st can be derived. Next the drawing force, the

dimensions of the drawn bar and the die diameter is used to calculate:

1. The true strain in the drawn bar (dr)

2. Work per unit volume expended in the drawing process (W/V)dr

The work per unit volume that would have been done to extend the bar in simple tension

instead of through drawing is calculated by substituting (dr) into the equation for derived for

(W/V)st. Then can be calculated using:

= (W/V)dr/(W/V)st (1)

4. SIMPLE TENSION PROCEDURE

To determine the ideal work done per unit volume, the stress/strain properties of the

material need to be determined. Two methods based on tensile test results will be used.

Step 1. Measure the initial diameter, Do of the test specimen. Use the extensometer to

measure the increase in length of the initial 2 inch gauge length. Note load reading, F, at

approximate extensions of .01, .02, .04, .06, .08, .10, .12, .14, .16, .18 and .20 inches. Take

care not to exceed the .25 inch range of the extensometer, as this will damage the instrument.
Step 2. Remove the extensometer from the specimen and continue the tensile test until

fracture of the bar. Record the peak load during the test Fmax and measure the final diameter

of the specimen, DF, some distance away from the neck that results in fracture.

Method 1
1. From the tensile test results determine the true stress (i) and true strain (i) for each load

(Fi) and extension (Li). (Table provided).

2. The work done per unit volume in the tensile test is equal to the area under the stress/strain

curve. However the results of the tensile test need to be extrapolated up to the strain

produced in drawing, so a relationship between, (W/V)st and needs to be found. An

approximate numerical integration can be used for this.

For each data point determine the work done per unit volume up to the current strain,

(W/V)sti. This is given by the following expression:

(W/V)sti=1/2 11 + 1/2(2 + 1)(2-1) + (3 + 2)(3-2) + 1/2(i+ i-1)(i-i-1) (2)

This equation approximates to the area under the true stress/true strain curve for strain i

(Figure 1). By plotting (W/V)st versus on log-log scales or otherwise determine the

constants in the relationship:

(W/V)st = kb.. (3)

Method 2
From the peak load and the final diameter of the tensile specimen (away from the neck)

determine the approximate stress/strain relationship:

= Bn . (4)
from the following approximate method:

Exponent, n, is equal to the largest uniform strain and therefore is given by:

n = 2 Ln (Do/DF) (5)

Applied stress at maximum load is: = Bnn where

= Fmax/(DF2/4)

Therefore B = 4 Fmax/(DF2nn) (6)

By following this procedure an approximate stress strain relationship for the bar material is

found of the form:

= Bn . (7)

The ideal work done per unit volume is given by the following expression:

(W/V)st = Bn+1 / (n+1).. (8)

This enables the ideal work done per unit volume to be calculated by substituting the true

strain for each reduction during the drawing tests. The redundant work factor is then

calculated by dividing the actual work done per unit volume by the ideal work done per unit

volume.

5. BAR DRAWING PROCEDURE

The drawing process is presented schematically in Figure 2. Draw specimens through the .

304, .321 and the .356 inch diameter dies. Note the average drawing force from the load cell

attached to the drawing bench and obtain force-time graphs from the attached computer and

printer.

Since the volume of metal does not change during the drawing process the length of the

bar (L1) after drawing can be found from the relationship:

Volume = (*Do2/4)*Lo=(*D12/4)*L1 (7)

Where L0= length of the bar before drawing (in)

D0= diameter of the bar before drawing (in)

D1 = diameter of the bar after drawing = die diameter

The work done, W = force x distance

W = Fd * L1

where Fd is the drawing force.

Therefore,

(W/V)dr =[Fd * L1]/[(*D12/4)*L1} = Fd/[(D12/4)] (9)

which is numerically equal to drawing stress applied to the bar during the drawing operation.

The ideal true strain in bar drawing is given by:

DR = ln(L1/L0) = 2 ln (Do/D1) (10)

Using the drawing strain in each case determine the equivalent (W/V)st, for simple tension

using methods 1 and 2 above. Equations (3) and (4) should be used. Put these values in the

table provided. For both methods calculate the redundant work factor , using equation (1).

A rule of thumb states that the drawing process is most efficient when the length of die

contact (Lc) is equal to the mean diameter of the drawn bar (D). The die geometry is

illustrated in Figure 3. When Lc is less than D, the amount of internal distortion of the metal

during deformation increases and efficiency drops. When Lc is larger than D, the effect of

surface die friction increases and efficiency again falls. Determine Lc/D from the die geometry

with the following equations:

tan () = (Do-D1)/(2Lc)

Lc =. .5(Do-D1)/tan()

Where is the die angle and in this case is equal to 7.5 degrees. Is the rule of the thumb

correct according to your data and calculations?

6. DISCUSSION

Present your results and calculations in a report, which should include any necessary

graphs. Comment on the differences between the values determined and discuss the

reasons behind these differences.

True 9
Stress 8
7
6
5

3
2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
True Strain,

FIGURE1STRESSVERSUSSTRAIN

D0 D1
D
Fd

Lc

FIGURE2DRAWINGSCHEMATIC
(D0 D1)/2

Lc

FIGURE3DIEGEOMETRY
 Table1TensileTestResults

True Stress Work per unit

Target extension Actual extension Force (lb) True strain
Reading #, i i vol.
Li Li Fi
lb/in2 (W/V)sti

1 0.01

2 0.02

3 0.04

4 0.06

5 0.08

6 0.10

7 0.12

8 0.14

9 0.16

10 0.18

11 0.20
 Table2DrawingTestData

Die size Drawing force Actual work Ideal work, (W/V)st Redundant work factor,
Lc/D
(in) (lb) (W/V)dr Method1 Method2 Method1 Method2
ORTHOGONAL METAL CUTTING MP5

1. OBJECTIVE
To observe the basic mechanics of metal cutting. Trends in the cutting process are

observed while varying cutting parameters and workpiece material. Chip formation is also

observed and studied.

2. EQUIPMENT

Hardware

Horizontal Milling Machine. Adapted to carry out a slow spped orthogonal

planning operation

Combination Workpiece Fixture and Dynamometer. Used to hold the

three different workpiece materials during the cutting operation. The built in

dynamometer converts the applied force to a representative signal.

High Speed Steel cutting tool. Used to carry out the cutting process. This

wedge shaped tool is mounted in a special tool holder on the horizontal milling

machine.

Three workpiece materials (Aluminum, Brass, and Copper). The workpiece

material is varied to observe the effects of material properties on the cutting

process.

Video Microscope. Used to take a magnified picture of the cutting process.

It interfaces with the computer through a frame grabber video board.

 Frame Grabber Video Board. Used to display the cutting process in real

time. A picture of the metal cutting process can be frozen when the student

desires. The still picture is then analyzed using the computer and Global Lab

Image software package.

Data Acquisition Board. Used to gather the horizontal and vertical force

signals from the dynamometer. These signals are then plotted and analyzed

using the Labtech Notebook and Microsoft Excel software packages.

Computer. Used to run the software necessary to acquire and analyze the

measured data.

Software

Global Lab Image. Used to process and analyze the still picture from the

frame grabber board.

Labtech Notebook. Used to acquire data from the data acquisition board.

Microsoft Excel. Used to display and statistically analyze the force

measurements from the Labtech Notebook software.

 R

Figure 1. Orthogonal Metal Removal Process

N
tc F
R

t0

FH
FV
R

Figure 2. Experimental Set-up for Orthogonal Cutting

Tool
Rake angle,

Feed direction
 Material 3 Material 2 Material 1

Fixture

3. DISCUSSION
The mechanism of metal cutting is quite complex but the basic theory can be

explained by a simplified two dimensional (orthogonal) model as given in Figure 1.

Orthogonal cutting is used as a model to approximate the force relationships in a real life

machining process. The two measured components of the cutting force are the horizontal

force (FH ) and the vertical force (FV). These force components are conveniently

measured using a dynamometer. Using these measured force components the forces

acting on the shear plane and along the face of the cutting tool can be calculated. The

effect of varying the cutting process parameters is determined by comparing these

calculated forces.

During this experiment it will be noticed that the chip thickness is considerably larger

than the depth of cut. This large chip thickness indicates a small shear angle is present and

relatively inefficient metal removal occurs. The metal removal is inefficient because energy

has been wasted deforming the discarded chip. The forces required to cut the metal also

increase as the shear angle decreases. This increase in force is due to the large shear area

that accompanies the small shear angle. A larger force is required to shear more material.

Metal cutting becomes more efficient as the chip thickness decreases and the shear

angle increases. The metal removal is efficient because energy has not been wasted

deforming the discarded chip. The most efficient machining process takes place when the

chip thickness equals the depth of cut because no unnecessary deformation of the chip

occurs. The forces required to cut the metal also decrease as the chip thickness decreases

and the shear angle increases. This decrease in force is due to the small shear area that

accompanies the large shear angle. A smaller force is required to shear less material.
 The shear angle will be calculated using the cutting ratio (rc)(rc = tc/t0) and the tool

rake angle () as shown in Figure 1. Both the cutting ratio and the tool rake angle are

measured from the image of the chip formation obtained in the experiment.

r sin
tan
1 r cos

The power required for the orthogonal metal cutting operation is given by the following

equation:

FH v
HP
33000

where:

v = the cutting speed in feet per minute (This is the feed rate setting on the

horizontal milling machine).

FH = the horizontal force in lbs. This is measured using the dynamometer.

33000 = the conversion from ft lb/min. to horsepower.

Notice from the equation above that the horsepower required to cut the metal

decreases as the horizontal cutting force decreases. Less power is used and metal cutting

is more efficient when the chip thickness is reduced because the horizontal cutting force

decreases.

The chip thickness is reduced by using a tool with a large rake angle. Unfortunately,

large rake angle tools are weaker and fail faster than small rake angle tools.

If a small rake angle tool is used the tool will last a longer time but more energy for

cutting the metal is required. If a large rake angle tool is used then less energy for cutting

the metal is required, but the tools will wear out quickly. This situation implies an

optimum rake angle exists. At this optimum rake angle the sum of the cutting power costs
and the tool replacement costs will be a minimum. Optimum rake angles and

corresponding optimum shear angles have been determined for various tool/work

combinations. This information is commonly available in manufacturing engineering

handbooks. If some new tool/work combination is used it is necessary to perform an

experiment to determine the optimum rake angle to use.

The friction force (F) of the chip sliding on the tool face and the normal force (N)

perpendicular to the tool face, as shown in Figure 1, may be calculated from the following

relationships.

F FH sin FV cos
N FH cos FV sin

where = the tool rake angle.

The resulting coefficient of friction between the tool face and the chip is the tangent

of the friction angle, , as shown in Figure 1. The coefficient of friction, , is given by the

following equation.

F
tan
N

4. PROCEDURE

1. Understand milling machine safety and operating instructions.

2. Clean workpieces and fixture to remove all chips.

3. Ensure that the work is firmly clamped within the fixture.

4. Clamp the +150 rake angle tool securely in the tool holder so the cutting

edge is orthogonal to the feed motion.

5. Ensure the cutting tool straddles the workpieces with an equal overhang on

each side.

6. Hand feed the milling table longitudinally across the workpieces to ensure

the tool clears all lighting equipment and fixture components.

7. Set the milling machine feed to the first feed rate specified in the data

sheets.

8. Return the tool to the starting position and establish a reference plane by

removing a light chip from the three workpieces.

9. Clean workpieces and fixture to remove all chips.

10. Open the Global Lab Image software package.

11. Note the force readings from the voltage indicators and collect a sample

chip for each material. Measure the chip thickness of each chip with the

micrometer.

12. Return tool to starting position and adjust milling machine for a depth of

cut of .004 inches. Begin cutting the workpieces.

13. Use the Global Lab Image software to capture one picture of the cutting

process for each workpiece.

14. Close the Labtech Run-Time Data Acquisition Module to stop acquiring

data.

15. Repeat steps 12 through 16 for each of the remaining feed rates specified in

the data sheets.

16. Using the Global Lab Image software to measure the depth of cut, the chip

thickness, and the shear angle for each of the stored images or measure

from the printed images. Record all data.

5. EVALUATION

1. Calculate the shear angle for each cutting condition using the measured cutting ratio.

Compare the calculated value with the shear angle you measured on the stored

image.

2. Calculate the mean horizontal and vertical cutting forces for each workpiece and feed.

Calculate the standard deviation of the cutting forces for each workpiece and feed.

3. Calculate the friction force (F) and the normal force (N) at the tool-chip interface for

each cutting condition. Determine the friction angle () and the coefficient of

friction () for each cutting condition.

4. Calculate the horsepower required for each of the cuts taken.

5. Plot the following using a separate graph for each work material:

a. Shear angle () versus cutting speed,(table speed), v.

b. Coefficient of friction () versus cutting speed.

c. Required Horsepower versus cutting speed.

Draw some conclusions on the above graphs.

ORTHOGONALMETALCUTTINGDATASHEET

Toolrakeangle=_____.

Shear Vertical
Work Table feed Depth of Horizontal
angle () force, FV
Material (ipm) cut (in) force, FV (lb)
deg (lb)
 0.6 0.004

Aluminum 1.5 0.004

2.3 0.004

0.6 0.004

Brass 1.5 0.004

2.3 0.004

0.6 0.004

Copper 1.5 0.004

2.3 0.004

TOOL WEAR AND TOOL LIFE MP4

1. OBJECTIVE

To study the effect of cutting velocity on the wear and life of a cutting tool used for

turning.

2. EQUIPMENT

Engine lathe; cylindrical workpiece; toolmaker's microscope; carbide insert (cutting tool)

with geometry specifications of -5, -5, 5, 5, 15, 15, 3/64.

3. DISCUSSION

Machineability describes the relative difficulty encountered in cutting various

metals. Hardness, shear strength, microstructure, rate of strain hardening, formation of a

built-up edge (BUE), and other properties of a material determine the limit on cutting

speed for a given tool-work combination. The relative machineability of an alloy may be

determined by comparing the tool life obtained when it is machined under certain

conditions with that obtained when machining SAE B1112 steel under the same
conditions. However, that type of machineability rating leaves much to be desired because

it is too general and fails to account for variations in physical properties, microstructure,

workhardenability, surface finish, cutting conditions, etc. The dominant machining

parameter affecting tool life for a given tool/work combination is the cutting speed, v. It

has been found experimentally that the relationship between tool life, T, and cutting speed

is of the general form vTn = C. This equation is known as the Taylor tool life equation,

after F.W. Taylor who first observed this relationship in the early 1900s.

Since the Taylor Equation plots as a straight line on logarithmic coordinates,

considerable predictive information can be obtained by fitting a least squares trend line to

relatively few (5 or 6) experimental points. By using different feed rates, a family of

curves can be determined which can be used to predict the approximate cutting speed and

feed for the most economical rate of metal removal. However, the latter problem is

beyond the scope of this experiment. The criterion for tool life is a particularly important

aspect of the experimental procedure for using Taylor's empirical tool life equation.

Experience has shown that tool materials wear differently depending upon the chemical

nature and physical properties of the work material and the relative velocity and thus the

frictional heat generated at the tool-chip interface. In general, when the flank wear is

plotted as a function of minutes of tool life, the curve shows three portions: a rapid initial

rise, a reduced slope of approximately constant value, and finally, a rapid rise which
becomes nearly vertical as the point of failure is approached. At relatively high cutting

speeds, the central portion of the curve disappears and tool life is very short (1 min. or

less). At lower than normal speeds, tool life is much prolonged, but the rate of metal

removal is small (Figure 1). In some cases, particularly with the cast iron cutting grades

of carbides, a built-up edge (BUE) is produced at low cutting speeds. Therefore, tool life

curves for carbide tools should not be extrapolated below 200 fpm, because the BUE

formed when carbides are used at low speed causes a catastrophic failure in about 1

minute. Triple carbides, i.e., TiC, TaC and WC must be used to machine steel successfully.

Tool failure usually occurs either because of excessive crater wear or from flank wear to

such an extent that cutting ceases and excessive tool-work contact generates so much

frictional heat that the tool softens and erodes to destruction. In production practice, this

occurs soon after 0.030" flank wear. Therefore, in the United States, a limit on flank wear

of 0.030 in. is usually standard. The ISO Standard for tool life testing for sintered carbide

tools specifies a maximum flank land width of 0.3 mm or 0.012 inches.

Carbide cutting inserts are very brittle, so considerable care must be taken to be

sure no chips are in the seat before locking the tool in place. Also, all traces of the built-

up edge must be removed from the first side of the insert before turning it over to use the

last four edges.

 Figure1 Typical Tool Wear Curves

Figure 2 Wear in Cutting Tools

4. PROCEDURE
 1. Observe each cutting edge under a microscope before using it to be sure

that there are no nicks or cracks which could cause premature failure. Be

sure that the carbide tool holder seat is clean; then, mount the tool and

clamp it securely in the seat of the tool holder. Set the machine properly

for the first cut. The following speeds, depth-of-cut, and feed will be used:

Cutting speed
Depth of cut (in.) Feed (ipr)
(sfpm)

Material: 1045 Steel 0.015 800, 700, 600 0.0024

2. STOP THE FEED; BACK OFF THE TOOL; and THEN, STOP THE

SPINDLE. Remove the tool and use the toolmaker's microscope to

measure the flank wear-land. Use 30 sec. cutting time increments for the

first minute and then every few minutes, as listed under 4, of cutting time

until a 0.012 in. wear land has developed. Note that more than three points

(at least 5 or 6 usually) are needed to determine the Taylor Equation from

the data. Record the wear-land values in Tables 1 to 3. Use care to align

the undamaged surface of the insert with the cross-hair in the eyepiece

before measuring the wear-land.

3. Index the carbide insert 90 in the tool holder and gather a new set of data

for each of the other speeds.

4. Take measurements of the tool wear at the following time intervals:

a) At 600 fpm take measurements at 1 minute and 2 minutes from the start

of cutting and then every 4 minutes after this until a wear land width of

0.012 inches is obtained.

 b) At 700 fpm take measurements at 1 minute and 2 minutes from the start

of cutting and then every 4 minutes after this until a wear land width of

0.012 inches is obtained.

c) At 800 fpm take measurements at 1 minute and 2 minutes after the start

of cutting and then every 3 minutes after this until a wear land width of

0.012 inches is obtained.

5. EVALUATION
1. Develop a tool life curve for the supplied carbide tool insert by plotting the

measured flank wear-land for each cutting edge as a function of cutting

time (in minutes).

2. The tool life is assumed to be when the flank wear land reaches width

0.01. Determine the tool life in minutes for each cutting speed.

3. Sketch the final flank wear and crater wear patterns developed on the tool

insert at each cutting speed.

4. How do you think the use of a cutting fluid would affect the results

observed?

5. What limits, if any, are there to the extrapolation of the tool life curve in

either direction?

6. Plot tool life against cutting speed using log scales and from this determine

C and n for Taylors equation.

 Table 1 Data Sheet for Tool Wear

Tool Material: Tungsten Carbide Work Material: 1045 Steel

Feed, f: 0.024 ipr Cutting speed, v: 600 fpm Depth of Cut, d: 0.015 in

Cutting time (min), t Volume removed (in3) Flank land wear (in)

Volume removed = fdvt

 Table 2 Data Sheet for Tool Wear

Tool Material: Tungsten Carbide Work Material: 1045 Steel

Feed, f: 0.024 ipr Cutting speed, v: 700 fpm Depth of Cut, d: 0.015 in

Cutting time (min), t Volume removed (in3) Flank land wear (in)

Volume removed = fdvt

 Table 3 Data Sheet for Tool Wear

Tool Material: Tungsten Carbide Work Material: 1045 Steel

Feed, f: 0.024 ipr Cutting speed, v: 800 fpm Depth of Cut, d: 0.015 in

Cutting time (min), t Volume removed (in3) Flank land wear (in)

Volume removed = fdvt