Journal of Materials Processing Technology 176 (2006) 152157

Study on mechanisms of burr formation and edge breakout

near the exit of orthogonal cutting
Gwo-Lianq Chern
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, 123 University Road, Sec. 3, Touliu, Yunlin 640, Taiwan

Abstract
The scanning electron microscope (SEM) technique had been used as an instrument to study chip formation mechanism in metal cutting. In this
paper the mechanisms of burr formation and edge breakout near the exit of orthogonal cutting are analyzed, based on the direct observation using a
machining substage inside the SEM. It is found that a negative deformation plane begins to form when the steady-state chip formation stops as the
tool approaches the end of the cut. Plastic bending and shearing of the negative deformation plane are the dominant mechanisms in burr formation
whereas crack propagation along the plane causes the edge breakout. Two modes of breakout formation were observed. Fracture mechanisms
involved during the cut were identified by examining the fracture surfaces obtained from the impact machining tests. These observations are of
crucial importance to the proper mathematical formulation and development of a burr/breakout model in orthogonal cutting.
2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Orthogonal cutting; Burr formation; Edge breakout; Fractography

1. Introduction
Visualization of dynamic events while they take place is very
important to the proper formulation of mathematical models of
those events, even though the visualization might be only qualitative. Since the 1960s, electron microscope techniques have
been employed to examine materials deformed during manufacturing processes [1]. By a direct examination of chip formation
while machining, a considerable amount of information relevant to the development of the theory of metal cutting can be
obtained.
Important information about the nature of fracture can be
obtained from microscopic examination of the fracture surface.
This study is usually called fractography. Fractography is most
commonly done using the SEM due to its ease of operation and
specimen preparation [2]. The large depth of field and the good
resolution make the SEM an excellent tool for research and for
failure analysis [3].
This paper first gives background information on the use of
the SEM technique as a research instrument in metal cutting.
The mechanisms of burr formation and edge breakout near the
exit of orthogonal cutting are analyzed by the direct observation of burr formation during the tests by a machining substage

Tel.: +886 5 5342601x4145; fax: +886 5 5312062.

E-mail address: cherngl@yuntech.edu.tw.

0924-0136/$ see front matter 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.03.127

inside the SEM. It is found that a negative deformation plane

begins to form when the steady-state chip formation stops as the
tool approaches the end of the cut. Plastic bending and shearing
of the negative deformation plane contribute to the burr formation, while crack propagation along the plane causes the edge
breakout. These observations are of crucial importance when
efforts have been focused on the development of a burr/breakout
model [4,5] in orthogonal cutting. Finally, a modified impact test
machine is used to carry out simulated orthogonal cuttings to collect chip samples for the study of fracture surfaces. Four kinds
of materials were tested: copper, aluminum alloys Al 1100, Al
2024-T4 and Al 6061-T6. The fracture mechanisms involved
during the cut were identified using the SEM fractography. The
experimental results and discussions are presented.
2. SEM and SEM machining substage
Electron microscopy techniques have been employed to
examine materials deformed by manufacturing processes since
the late 1960s [6,7]. These investigations have provided insights
into the fundamental mechanism of the machining process and
metal cutting theory [8]. Using SEM techniques, we are able to
compare the deformed structures in chips and to examine the
workpiece surface with details never previously possible.
In machining, as cutting proceeds, the material ahead of the
cutting tool is deformed first in the primary shear zone and sub-

G.-L. Chern / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 176 (2006) 152157

sequently in the secondary shear zone, i.e., chiptool interface.

To investigate the behavior of plastic deformation in these zones,
four techniques have been utilized [9]: (1) the use of a quick-stop
device for collecting samples of chip roots; (2) high-speed photography; (3) metallurgical examination of longitudinal sections
of the chip and (4) in situ machining inside an SEM.
The quick-stop device is criticized for not being rapid enough
to obtain a frozen specimen to portray the real cutting process,
and also for being a post mortem analysis. The high-speed photography yields poor resolution and is less frequently used. The
third technique can only provide information on the secondary
shear zone. The fourth technique, which is the subject of this
paper, overcomes the above limitations and allows direct observation of the machining process.
The SEM combines good resolution with a large depth of
field and is capable of producing very high magnification at low
scanning rates [10]. The first reported machining stage inside
the SEM was built by Ramalingam and Bell [1]. It was designed
to observe the microscopic orthogonal chip formation dynamically. In 1980, a specimen stage for in situ orthogonal machining
studies inside the SEM was designed by GE [11] as an improved
version of the one originally built by Ramalingam and Bell. Only
an extremely low cutting speed is possible inside the SEM due to
the high magnification and the scanning rate. The major requirements for a machining stage include: (1) translation of workpiece
against a fixed tool at constant velocity; (2) adequate rigidity and
ability to withstand the cutting forces; (3) reversible drive mechanism to easily disconnect cutting stage and (4) transverse, tilt
and rotary motions to permit observations on various regions of
interest during cutting.
At UC Berkeley, a machining substage was designed by Stiles
[12] based on the GE work. Originally it was designed for observation of the micro-cutting mechanism at high magnification.
Although the machining conditions with this device in no way
resemble normal feeds and speeds, the set-up proved to be
very useful to investigate the burr formation in the orthogonal
cutting process.
3. Burr formation and edge breakout during SEM
machining
In order to investigate the burr formation mechanism in
the machining process, dynamic observation is necessary. The
machining tests inside the SEM were carried out to observe the
burr formation and edge breakout near the exit of orthogonal
cutting using the Berkeley machining substage [12]. The cutting tool and the workpiece were first mounted on the SEM
machining stage for a given nominal depth of cut. The cutting
speed was confined to be as slow as 0.1 in./min (2.54 mm/min)
because of the scanning frequency of the SEM. Since the chip
morphology is known to be invariant with respect to cutting
speed [1], the slow speed observations are indeed representative of conventional metal cutting. Three kinds of material were
used in the SEM machining tests: annealed copper, aluminum
alloys Al 2024-T4 and Al 6061-T6. The mechanical properties
of the materials and the cutting conditions used are listed in
Table 1.

153

Table 1
Mechanical properties of the work materials
Material

Tensile
strength (MPa)

Yield stress
(MPa)

Fracture
strain

Copper (annealed)
Copper (cold drawn)
Al 1100 (cold drawn)
Al 2024-T4
Al 6061-T6

223
314
165
441
310

69
279
145
290
275

1.26
1.21
2.30
0.13
0.50

The authors previous work [4,5] had found that the burr formation mechanism in orthogonal cutting can be divided into
three stages: initiation, burr development and final burr formation. Initiation of burr formation is characterized by the negative
deformation angle denoted as o , Fig. 1(a), and the initial tool
distance of tool tip A from the end of workpiece, . AB is named
the negative deformation plane, as was suggested by Iwata et
al. [13].
In Fig. 2, successive SEM photomicrographs of the burr
formation process during orthogonal cutting of copper are illustrated. Fig. 2(a) shows the initiation of the burr formation. Fracture causing chip separation from the workpiece can be clearly
observed along a direction, AC, which is essentially in the direction of the shear angle in steady-state chip formation. An uncut
free surface, CE, can be seen near the end of the workpiece. The
remaining deformed material extending beyond the workpiece
edge that is perpendicular to the cutting direction is the burr. If
edge breakout occurs instead of burr formation, a crack along
the negative deformation plane will be initiated at this stage,
depending on the material behavior. A rough chamfer will be
created at the edge of the workpiece if edge breakout occurs.
As the tool advances, the negative deformation angle becomes
larger, as shown in Fig. 2(b). Material near the workpiece edge is
pushed out of the tools path as the tool approaches the end of the
cut. Finally the burr is formed and the chip is totally separated
from the burr.
For edge breakout, two modes of processes on the negative
deformation plane were observed from the machining tests, as
shown schematically in Fig. 3. For Al 2024-T4 in Fig. 3(a),
edge breakout is caused by the plastic bending deformation.
The normal stress associated with the bending moment opens
the crack along the negative deformation plane, AB. A foot is
created at the end of the chip. The bottom surface of the foot is the
matching surface of the chamfer on the workpiece. In Fig. 3(b)
for Al 6061-T6, slip occurs along the negative deformation plane
by the shear stress. Friction between the chip and the workpiece
produces a minor burr at the end of the negative deformation
plane, B. Edge breakout was not observed in the machining tests
on copper under the chosen cutting conditions. Reasons for this
might be the fact that copper is more ductile and has a higher
fracture strain than Al 2024-T4 and Al 6061-T6.
4. Fracture mechanisms in burr formation and edge
breakout
To study the fracture mechanisms observed during burr formation in the SEM machining tests, i.e., (1) fracture causing chip

154

G.-L. Chern / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 176 (2006) 152157

Fig. 1. Burr/breakout formation model [4]: (a) initiation, (b) development and (c) final burr formation.

Fig. 2. SEM photomicrographs of annealed copper: (a) fracture causing chip separation and (b) development of burr formation.

Fig. 3. Schematic illustration of breakout modes: (a) breakout according to normal stresses and (b) breakout according to shear stresses.

G.-L. Chern / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 176 (2006) 152157

155

Fig. 4. Schematic illustration of impact machining test.

separation and (2) fracture along the negative deformation plane

causing edge breakout, fractography study is thus necessary. The
SEM machining substage can perform orthogonal cutting and
provide real time observation, however, the workpiece is limited to only 1/16 in. (1.6 mm) in width, i.e., the deformed chip
width is about the same as the above dimension during the planestrain deformation in orthogonal cutting. Such tiny chips are not
suitable for a fractography study due to the small area of the fractured surface. Thus, a modified impact test machine, which had
been employed in the authors previous work [4,5], was used to
carry out simulated orthogonal cutting to collect chip samples
for the examination of fracture surfaces. The configuration of
this impact machining test is shown in Fig. 4. The tool is fixed
to the pendulum by the specially designed tool holder. A precut is necessary in order to obtain a constant undeformed chip
thickness. The undeformed chip width is 6 mm, much greater
than the one in the SEM machining tests. The fracture mechanisms involved during the cut were identified using the SEM
fractography.
According to the ductility of the material, the fracture behavior during deformation will be either brittle or ductile [14,15].
With electron microscopic studies of a large number of metal
fracture surfaces, Beachem [16] showed that a considerable proportion of mechanical fractures occurred by some form of ductile
rupture, usually by void coalescence. His study of ductile rupture surfaces revealed three different but closely related modes
of void coalescence: (1) normal rupture; (2) shear rupture and
(3) tearing, depending upon the stress state in the material surrounding the voids, as shown in Fig. 5.
At low magnifications, the features in SEM fractographs
strongly resemble the aspects of the fracture apparent to the
naked eyes. But at high magnifications, more detail is visible
and needs to be categorized and described if the fractograph is to
be related to the micro-mechanisms of fracture that were active.
The principal categories of fracture features can be summarized
as [2,3,1719]: (1) cleavage features (tongues and micro-twins);
(2) quasi-cleavage features; (3) dimples from micro-void coalescence; (4) tear ridges; (5) fatigue striations; (6) mixed fracture
features and (7) features of fractures resulting from chemical
and thermal environments.

The one outstanding characteristic of most ductile rupture

surfaces is the presence of numerous concave depressions on
fracture surfaces. These depressions have been called cupules
and dimples by various investigators [1416]. The shape and
depth of dimples can be related to the applied stress state. Based
on the direct observation during the SEM machining tests, frac-

Fig. 5. Three basic modes of the coalescence of voids [16]: (a) normal rupture,
(b) shear rupture and (c) tearing.

156

G.-L. Chern / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 176 (2006) 152157

Table 2
Cutting conditions and tool geometry in impact machining
Cutting speed (m/s)
Undeformed chip thickness (mm)
Rake angle ( )
Nose radius (mm)
Cutting fluid

4.4 (fixed)
0.050.25
10
0.03
Air

ture causing chip separation initiates along the direction of the

shear angle when burr formation starts. To identify the fracture mechanism for burr formation and edge breakout, the SEM
photomicrographs were taken on the chip sample collected from
the impact machining tests. Four kinds of materials were tested:
copper (cold drown), aluminum alloys Al 1100 (cold drown), Al
2024-T4 and Al 6061-T6. The mechanical properties of the work
materials and the cutting conditions are shown in Tables 1 and 2.
Figs. 6 and 7 show the photomicrographs of the fracture surface
of an Al 1100 chip and a copper chip for the case of burr forma-

Fig. 6. SEM photomicrograph of the fracture surface of an Al 1100 chip.

Fig. 7. SEM photomicrograph of the fracture surface of a copper chip.

Fig. 8. SEM photomicrograph of the fracture surface of an Al 6061-T6 chip.

tion, respectively. The dimples are elongated, and their rounded

ends point in the direction of shear. These result from the voids
of all sources becoming spread out in the shear direction, as
pointed out by Fellows et al. [2].
In contrast to Figs. 69 show fracture surfaces for the case
of edge breakout. Shear dimples of Al 6061-T6 in Fig. 8 are
less elongated than for Al 1100 and copper, due to the fact that
Al 1100 and copper are more ductile metals. For Al 2024-T4 in
Fig. 9 with a higher magnification of 3000, it shows a wide range
in dimple sizes. Numerous fine dimples with a round shape can
be observed. This mode for coalescence of voids is known as
normal rupture, as shown in Fig. 5(a), which is caused under the
influence of normal stress. Such normal stress can be related to
the bending of the negative deformation plane we observed in
Fig. 3(a) from the SEM machining tests. With fractography we
know that the dominant fracture mechanism in the cutting on
ductile material is shear rupture, as shown in Fig. 5(b), while
normal rupture is responsible for the fracture mechanism on
brittle material.

Fig. 9. SEM photomicrograph of the fracture surface of an Al 2024-T4 chip.

G.-L. Chern / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 176 (2006) 152157

Table 3
Conclusions
Burr

Edge breakout

Mechanism

Formation of negative
deformation plane
(bending and shearing)

Formation of negative
deformation plane (crack
propagation)

Fracture mechanism

Shear rupture

Shear or normal rupture

5. Conclusions
The conclusions of this paper are summarized in Table 3.
From the direct observation of the SEM machining tests, it is
found that a negative deformation plane begins to form when
the steady-state chip formation stops as the tool approaches the
end of the cut. When the burr formation starts, fracture causing
chip separation initiates along a direction which is essentially in
the direction of the shear angle in the steady-state chip formation. Plastic bending and shearing of the negative deformation
plane contributes to the burr formation. If edge breakout occurs
instead of burr formation, a crack along the negative deformation
plane will be initiated, depending on the material behavior such
as the fracture strain. Fractography reveals that the facture mechanism involved in burr formation to be shear rupture. Shear or
normal rupture in the negative deformation plane contributes to
edge breakout, depending on the ductility of the materials. These
observations would lead up to the proper mathematical formulation and development of a burr/breakout model in orthogonal
cutting.
Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank Professor D.A. Dornfeld of
UC Berkeley for providing the facilities at the Laboratory of
Automation to perform the experiments. His helpful suggestions
and comments are deeply appreciated.
References
[1] S. Ramalingam, A.C. Bell, A scanning electron microscope stage for the
observation of chip formation, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 44 (5) (1973) 573576.

157

[2] J.A. Fellows, Comparison of scanning and transmission electron microscopes for fractography, in: J.A. Fellows, et al. (Eds.), Metals Handbook,
vol. 9, 8th ed., ASM, Ohio, 1981, pp. 6478.
[3] G.E. Dieter, Mechanical Metallurgy, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill Inc., New
York, 1986.
[4] G.L. Chern, D.A. Dornfeld, Burr/breakout model development and
experimental verification, J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 118 (1996) 201
206.
[5] G.L. Chern, Analysis of burr formation and breakout in metal cutting,
PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 1993.
[6] B.F. von Turkovich, Shear stress in metal cutting, J. Eng. Ind. 92 (1)
(1970) 151157.
[7] R.L. Williams, H.P. Prewett, Evaluation of ERM surface and subsurface integrity using photomicrographs, SME Paper no. MR70-237,
1970.
[8] J.T. Black, On the fundamental mechanism of large strain plastic
deformationelectron microscopy of metal cutting chips, J. Eng. Ind.
93 (2) (1971) 507526.
[9] M. Komaraiah, P.N. Reddy, Rotary ultrasonic machininga new cutting
process and its performance, Int. J. Prod. Res. 29 (11) (1991) 2177
2187.
[10] R.S. Carbonara, Ion scattering spectroscopy for microstructural analysis,
in: J.L. McCall, W.M. Mueller (Eds.), Microstructure Analysis Tools &
Technology, Plenum Press, New York, 1973, pp. 315329.
[11] R. Komanduri, S.R. Hayashi, J.O. Fielding, R.B. Bolon, A specimen stage for in situ orthogonal machining studies inside the SEM,
Tech. Inform. Series, Report no. 80CRD071, GE Research Center, NY,
1980.
[12] T.A. Stiles, A scanning electron microscope (SEM) machining substage
for metal cutting observation and acoustic emission analysis, MS thesis,
University of California, Berkeley, 1985.
[13] K. Iwata, K. Ueda, K. Okuda, Study of mechanism of burrs formation
in cutting based on direct SEM observation, J. Soc. Prec. Eng. 48 (4)
(1982) 510515.
[14] C.J. Beevers, R.W.K. Honeycombe, The initiation of ductile fracture in
pure metals, Philos. Mag. 7 (1962) 763773.
[15] K.E. Puttick, Ductile fracture in metals, Philos. Mag. 4 (1959) 964
969.
[16] C.D. Beachem, Orientation of cleavage facets in tempered martensite
(quasi-cleavage) by single surface trace analysis, Metallurgy 4 (1973)
19992000.
[17] F.A. McClintock, A criterion for ductile fracture by the growth of holes,
J. Appl. Mech. 90 (35) (1968) 363371.
[18] W.J. Plumbridge, D.A. Ryder, The metallography of fatigue, Metall.
Rev. 14 (136) (1969) 119142.
[19] A. Rukwied, D.B. Ballard, Scanning electron microscope fractography
of continuously cast high-purity copper after high temperature creep,
Metallurgy 3 (1972) 29993008.