In this paper, a new approach for evaluating the cryogenic machining process of the carbon nanotube reinforced aluminum matrix composites is developed based on finite element method. Finite element modeling in commercial code ABAQUS/Explicit was used to simulate high-speed machining of carbon nanotube reinforced composites under dry and cryogenic conditions, where different parameters (carbon nanotubes loading and the cutting speed) were investigated. The matrix phases are given a Johnson–Cook failure criterion. For considering more realistic assumptions, mechanical and thermal properties of the materials are assumed as a function of temperature. Results shown that at the cutting velocity of 60 m/s, cryogenic cooling has caused decrease of workpiece plastic strain by 12% in comparison with the dry cooling. The model can be used to study the effect of weight fraction, orientation, and length of the carbon nanotubes on the manufacturing of the nanocomposites.
EsawiAMFaragMM. Carbon nanotube reinforced composites: potential and current challenges. Mater Des2007; 28: 2394–2401.
2.
YildizYNalbantM. A review of cryogenic cooling in machining processes. Int J Mach Tools Manufact2008; 48: 947–964.
3.
RotellaGLuTSettineriLet al.Dry and cryogenic machining: comparison from the sustainability perspective. In: Sustainable Manufacturing, Berlin: Springer, 2012, pp. 95–100.
4.
BiermannDAbrahamsHMetzgerM. Experimental investigation of tool wear and chip formation in cryogenic machining of titanium alloys. Adv Manufact2015; 3: 292–299.
5.
DineshSSenthilkumarVAsokanP. Experimental studies on cryogenic machining of bio-degradable ZK60 Mg alloy using micro-textured tools. Mater Manufact Process2017; 32: 979–987.
6.
GiasinKAyvar-SoberanisSHodzicA. Evaluation of cryogenic cooling and minimum quantity lubrication effects on machining GLARE laminates using design of experiments. J Clean Prod2016; 135: 533–548.
7.
UmbrelloDCarusoSImbrognoS. Finite element modelling of microstructural changes in dry and cryogenic machining AISI 52100 steel. Mater Sci Technol2016, pp. 1–9.
8.
PittalàGMMonnoM. A new approach to the prediction of temperature of the workpiece of face milling operations of Ti–6Al–4V. Appl Therm Eng2011; 31: 173–180.
9.
TounsiNEl-WardanyT. Finite element analysis of chip formation and residual stresses induced by sequential cutting in side milling with microns to sub-micron uncut chip thickness and finite cutting edge radius. Adv Manufact2015; 3: 309–322.
10.
Molnár TG, Insperger T, Hogan SJ, et al. Investigating multiscale phenomena in machining: the effect of cutting-force distribution along the tool’s rake face on process stability. In: ASME 2015 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2015, pp.134–146.
11.
WuXLiLHeNet al.Investigation on the influence of material microstructure on cutting force and bur formation in the micro cutting of copper. Int J Adv Manufact Technol2015; 79: 321–327.
12.
CotterellMByrneG. Dynamics of chip formation during orthogonal cutting of titanium alloy Ti–6Al–4V. CIRP Ann Manufact Technol2008; 57: 93–96.
13.
PusavecF. Porous tungsten machining under cryogenic conditions. Int J Refract Metals Hard Mater2012; 35: 84–89.
14.
Chen SJ, Pang Q and Cheng K. Finite element simulation of the orthogonal metal cutting process. Materials Science Forum. Trans Tech Publ, Vol. 20, 2004, pp.582–620.
15.
ZhangYMabroukiTNeliasDet al.Chip formation in orthogonal cutting considering interface limiting shear stress and damage evolution based on fracture energy approach. Finite Elem Anal Des2011; 47: 850–863.
16.
HochengH. Machining technology for composite materials: principles and practice, Sawston, Cambridge: Elsevier, 2011.
17.
GuptaMKSinghGSoodPK. Experimental investigation of machining AISI 1040 medium carbon steel under cryogenic machining: a comparison with dry machining. J Inst Eng (India): Ser C2015; 96: 373–379.
18.
DhananchezianMKumarMP. Cryogenic turning of the Ti–6Al–4V alloy with modified cutting tool inserts. Cryogenics2011; 51: 34–40.
19.
Ghosh R, Zurecki Z and Frey JH. Cryogenic machining with brittle tools and effects on tool life. In: ASME 2003 international mechanical engineering congress and exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2003, pp.201–209.
20.
DeVorRKapoorS. Microstructure-level machining simulation of carbon nanotube reinforced polymer composites – Part I: Model development and validation. Urbana2008; 51: 61801–61801.
21.
DikshitASamuelJDeVorRet al.Microstructure-level machining simulation of carbon nanotube reinforced polymer composites – Part II: Model interpretation and application. J Manufact Sci Eng2008; 130: 031115–031115.
22.
DikshitASamuelJDeVorREet al.A microstructure-level material model for simulating the machining of carbon nanotube reinforced polymer composites. J Manufact Sci Eng2008; 130: 031110–031110.
23.
HiguchiROkabeTNagashimaT. Numerical simulation of progressive damage and failure in composite laminates using XFEM/CZM coupled approach. Compos A: Appl Sci Manufact .
24.
BhattacharyyaDAllenMManderS. Cryogenic machining of Kevlar composites. Mater Manufact Process1993; 8: 631–651.
25.
HolmquistTJTempletonDWBishnoiKD. Constitutive modeling of aluminum nitride for large strain, high-strain rate, and high-pressure applications. Int J Impact Eng2001; 25: 211–231.
26.
BarlatFGlazovMBremJet al.A simple model for dislocation behavior, strain and strain rate hardening evolution in deforming aluminum alloys. Int J Plast2002; 18: 919–939.
27.
SmerdRWinklerSSalisburyCet al.High strain rate tensile testing of automotive aluminum alloy sheet. Int J Impact Eng2005; 32: 541–560.
28.
ShujaSZYilbasBS. The influence of gas jet velocity in laser heating-a moving workpiece case. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2000; 214.8: 1059–1078.
29.
DengCWangDZhangXet al.Processing and properties of carbon nanotubes reinforced aluminum composites. Mater Sci Eng: A2007; 444: 138–145.
30.
PopovVN. Carbon nanotubes: properties and application. Mater Sci Eng: R: Rep2004; 43: 61–102.
31.
YakobsonBCampbellMBrabecCet al.High strain rate fracture and C-chain unraveling in carbon nanotubes. Comput Mater Sci1997; 8: 341–348.
32.
MeoMRossiM. Tensile failure prediction of single wall carbon nanotube. Eng Fract Mech2006; 73: 2589–2599.
33.
JacksonEMLaibinisPECollinsWEet al.Development and thermal properties of carbon nanotube-polymer composites. Compos B: Eng2016; 89: 362–373.
34.
GünayMKorkutIAslanEet al.Experimental investigation of the effect of cutting tool rake angle on main cutting force. J Mater Process Technol2005; 166: 44–49.
