Heat Transfer In Moving

Material
By
Sunkara Yasasvi
119106012
• The heat generated by friction and plastic deformation at the tool–
workpiece interface has a critical influence on several machining
processes.
• Under some cutting conditions, the temperature rise at the contact
interface strongly increases the tool wear and consequently reduces
the tool life.
• . The complexity of thermomechanical phenomena occurring during
the chip formation makes difficult the estimation of heat exchange at
the cutting zone.
• Experimental, theoretical or hybrid approaches are developed to
assess the temperature rise at the cutting zone and its consequence
on the cutting process.
• As experimental techniques, embedded thermocouples in the cutting
tool are widely used for the temperature measurement close to the
tool-rake face.
• The development of predictive theoretical models for chip formation
process is of great interest for the assessment of physical quantities,
like the temperature distribution at the tool–workpiece interface. The
models aim firstly to understand the physical phenomena involved
during machining and further to improve or optimise the cutting
process.
• In the modelling framework of the heat exchange at the cutting zone
during machining, heat balance equations should take into account
the different heat sources responsible of the temperature rise in the
tool–workpiece couple.
• These sources have mainly two origins: contact with friction at the
tool–workpiece interface and plastic deformation in the chip and in
the newly generated surface on the workpiece.
• The frictional heat can be partitioned into a part generated in the
cutting tool side (under contact) and a part generated in workmaterial
side (under contact) .This is often defined by the so-called heat
generation coefficient (HGC).
• The second heat source, due to the plastic work, contributes to the
temperature rise at the workmaterial layer under contact and can be
taken indirectly in the heat exchange at the tool–workpiece interface
by the introduction of a conduction heat flux, due to thermal contact
resistance (TCR) of imperfect contact, which involves the so-called
heat transfer coefficient (HTC), an inverse of the TCR coefficient.
• These coefficients have a significant impact in the assessment of the
temperature rise in the cutting tool during machining and it has been
the subject of several studies.
• With the development of numerical approaches, like Finite Element
Method (FEM), FE-based models are proposed since the FEM allows
treating complex cutting configurations with a possibility to include a
more realistic behaviour of materials and acceptable boundary
conditions.
• However, this necessitates the introduction of several parameters,
among them thermal coefficients (HPC, HGC, HTC, TCR…). Thus, a
hybrid FE/experimental approach has been proposed in order to
identify the HPC.
• Experimental set-up and procedure to assess the heat flux in the
cutting tool
1. Identification of the heat transfer function of the cutting tool
2. Assessment of the heat flux transmitted to the cutting tool during
machining
• Thermomechanical modelling of the cutting process
1. Mechanical and thermal balance equations
2. Workmaterial behaviour
3. Tool–workmaterial interface behaviour
a. Mechanical behaviour (interface friction law)
b. Thermal behaviour (interface heat balance)
• Identification of the HGC–HTC couple
1. Identification procedure
2. FE model for the numerical heat flux assessment
3. Heat flux in the tool assessed from FE calculations
a. Parametric analysis: effect of the HGC and HTC
b. Identified HGC and proposal of evolution laws
Experimental set-up and procedure to assess the
heat flux in the cutting tool
• From the experimental procedure, based on the resolution of the
IHCP, measured average heat flux in the tool is shown increasing with
cutting speed and tends to stagnate at high cutting speed. The
increase of the sliding velocity at the tool–chip interface with cutting
speed increases the frictional heat and consequently the heat part
transmitted to the tool. The observed stagnation of the heat flux is
due to the fact that even at high cutting speed the frictional heat
increases but it is more evacuated by the chip by the thermal
convection phenomena.
Thermomechanical modelling of the cutting
process
• Using a thermomechanical FE-based modelling, the parametric
analysis which consist to vary the HGC and HTC shows that some
values are aberrant, since they give much high heat flux going into the
tool, which does not correspond to the estimated one by experiment.
Hence an identification procedure of the HGC– HTC couple has been
proposed.
 1

HTC = 300 mW/mm^2°C

0.9

HTC = 200 mW/mm^2°C

0.8

HTC = 100 mW/mm^2°C

0.7

HTC = 0 mW/mm^2°C

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Sliding velocity [m/min]

Identification of the HGC–HTC couple
• The identification of the HGC–HTC couple shows that HGC for fixed
HTC evolves differently from low to high cutting speed (linear and
then nonlinear evolution). Three branches are defined. The first one
corresponds to the low cutting speed where HGC is considered
constant (velocity independent). The cutting speed is not high enough
to change the heating conditions of the tool. The second domain
corresponds to the moderate cutting speed where HGC increases
linearly. The heat at the contact interface is less evacuated by the
chip, since the chip velocity is quite low, so a high part of the frictional
heat contributes to the tool heating. The last one, from moderate to
high cutting speed, shows that HGC decreases nonlinearly and tends
to stagnate. The increase of the chip velocity with cutting speed
allows to the chip to evacuate more easily the interface thermal
energy, so the fraction of frictional heat in the tool side reduces as the
sliding velocity increases.
 Vc = 80 m/min

80 0.6

70

0.5

60

0.4
50

40 0.3

30

0.2

20 Heat flux exp.

Heat flux num. 0.1

10

HPC

0 0
0 100 200 300

HTC [mW/mm^2°C]
 Vc = 160 m/min

80 0.6

70

0.5

60

0.4
50

40 0.3

30

0.2

20 Heat flux exp.

Heat flux num. 0.1

10

HPC

0 0
0 100 200 300

HTC [mW/mm^2°C]
 Vc = 390 m/min

80 0.6

70

0.5

60

0.4
50

40 0.3

30

0.2

20 Heat flux exp.

Heat flux num. 0.1

10

HPC

0 0
0 100 200 300

HTC [mW/mm^2°C]
 Conclusion
• The validation of the identification procedure with three cutting
speeds (low, moderate and high) shows a very good agreement
between experimental and predicted heat fluxes. Despite the strong
dependency between the HGC and the HTC, the relative difference is
less than 11 %. This difference is in the uncertainty range on the
experimental one, which is about 20 %.
• It is important to note that the non-uniqueness of the HGC–HTC
couple necessitates additional characterization tests to obtain a single
set of parameters. So, using adequate thermal characterization of the
contact interface for considered tool/workpiece materials to identify
e.g. the HTC is necessary to determine the other parameter with the
proposed identification procedure (e.g. the HTC).