Investigation of cutting conditions and cutting edge preparations for enhanced compressive subsurface residual stress in the hard turning of bearing steel

Abstract Residual stresses in the machined surface and the subsurface are affected by cutting tool, workpiece, tool/workpiece interface, and cutting parameters, such as feed rate, depth of cut and cutting speed. The prediction of residual stress profile in the machined surface is difficult due to the lack of proper material model to depict the material behavior and the complex interaction among the dominant factors. In this paper, the effects of workpiece hardness, tool geometry as well as cutting conditions on the residual stress distribution in the hard machined surface are investigated using a newly proposed hardness-based flow stress model employed in an elastic-viscoplastic FEM formulation. Special attention is paid to the effect of cutting edge preparation on the beneficial as well as the penetration depth of the residual stress in the machined surface. Simulation using different cutting edge preparations, namely sharp edge, small hone, large hone, chamfer and different combinations of hone plus chamfer, are conducted to obtain residual stress profile on the machined surface. Numerical results show an optimal combination of large hone edge + chamfer and aggressive feed rate help to increase compressive residual stress in both axial and circumferential directions.

[1]  S. Mittal,et al.  Optimal pre-stressing the surface of a component by superfinish hard turning for maximum fatigue life in rolling contact , 1998 .

[2]  Shreyes N. Melkote,et al.  Effect of Tool Edge Geometry on Workpiece Subsurface Deformation and Through-Thickness Residual Stresses for Hard Turning of AISI 52100 Steel , 2000 .

[3]  David K. Aspinwall,et al.  The surface integrity of turned and ground hardened bearing steel , 1996 .

[4]  Fukuo Hashimoto,et al.  Effect of feed rate, workpiece hardness and cutting edge on subsurface residual stress in the hard turning of bearing steel using chamfer + hone cutting edge geometry , 2005 .

[5]  Shiro Kobayashi,et al.  Metal forming and the finite-element method , 1989 .

[6]  C. Liu,et al.  Mechanical Properties of Hardened AISI 52100 Steel in Hard Machining Processes , 2002 .

[7]  C. Richard Liu,et al.  Experimental study on the performance of superfinish hard turned surfaces in rolling contact , 2000 .

[8]  C. Liu,et al.  A method of modeling residual stresses in superfinish hard turning , 1998 .

[9]  Konstantinos-Dionysios Bouzakis,et al.  Superficial Plastic Response Determination of Hard Isotropic Materials Using Ball Indentations and a FEM Optimization Technique , 1999 .

[10]  M. Barash,et al.  Effect of Hardness on the Surface Integrity of AISI 4340 Steel , 1986 .

[11]  D. Umbrello,et al.  Hardness-based flow stress and fracture models for numerical simulation of hard machining AISI 52100 bearing steel , 2004 .

[12]  P. Dahlman,et al.  The influence of rake angle, cutting feed and cutting depth on residual stresses in hard turning , 2004 .

[13]  Fukuo Hashimoto,et al.  Surface Integrity Generated by Precision Hard Turning , 1999 .

[14]  Shreyes N. Melkote,et al.  Effect of Cutting-Edge Geometry and Workpiece Hardness on Surface Residual Stresses in Finish Hard Turning of AISI 52100 Steel , 1999, Manufacturing Science and Engineering.