Machining

1. ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Dry machining of aluminum for proper selection of cutting
tool: tool performance and tool wear
Sisira Kanta Pattnaik1
& Neeraj Kumar Bhoi1
& Sachidananda Padhi1
&
Saroj Kumar Sarangi1
Received: 6 January 2017 /Accepted: 13 March 2017
# Springer-Verlag London 2017
Abstract Machining of aluminum and its alloy is very diffi-
cult due to the adhesion and diffusion of aluminum, thus the
formation of built-up edge (BUE) on the surface. The BUE,
which affects the surface integrity and tool life significantly,
affects the service and performance of the workpiece. The
minimization of BUE was carried out by selection of proper
cutting speed, feed, depth of cut, and cutting tool material.
This paper presents machining of rolled aluminum at cutting
speeds of 336, 426, and 540 m/min, the feeds of 0.045, 0.06,
and 0.09 mm/rev, and a constant depth of cut of 0.2 mm in dry
condition. Five cutting tools WC SPUN grade, WC SPGN
grade, WC + PVD (physical vapor deposition) TiN coating,
WC + Ti (C, N) + Al2O3 PVD multilayer coatings, and PCD
(polycrystalline diamond) were utilized for the experiments.
The surface roughness produced, total flank wear, and cut chip
thicknesses were measured. The characterization of the tool
was carried out by a scanning electron microscope (SEM)
equipped with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS)
and X-ray diffraction (XRD) pattern. The chip underface
was analyzed for the study of chip deformation produced after
machining. The results indicated that the PCD tool provides
better results in terms of roughness, tool wear, and smoother
chip underface. It provides promising results in all aspects.
Keywords Surface integrity . SEM . XRD . Tool wear .
Chip underface
1 Introduction
Machining of aluminum and its alloy is very difficult due to the
formation of a built-up edge (BUE) on the tool surface. This
can be minimized by selecting the proper cutting speed, feed,
and cutting tool material. Surface integrity and tool life during
machining significantly affect the service and performance of
the workpiece. Aluminum and its alloy nowadays find frequent
application in the automobile and aerospace industries [1–4].
These alloys are very much popular due to their light weight,
good mechanical and chemical properties. However, with its all
qualities, there are some limitations; the formation of the BUE
and the built-up layer on the rake surface affects the surface
finish as well as tool life, during the machining of aluminum
[5]. In the case of dry machining, the formation of the BUE is a
major problem, but dry machining is always advisable because
wet machining requires a large amount of electrical power for
supplying cutting fluid and it provides an unhealthy environ-
ment also [6]. Moreover, dry machining is very advantageous
as it is economical, non-polluting to the atmosphere, not dan-
gerous to health, and not harmful to the skin [7, 8]. Aluminum
alloys are very abrasive in nature; therefore, tool wear, espe-
cially crater wear on the rake surface of the tool, is a very
common phenomenon [9]. Among several causes of tool wear
in the dry machining of aluminum alloys with tungsten carbide
(WC), inserts occur mainly due to adhesion and diffusion [10].
Carbide tools were basically employed for machining alumi-
num alloys specially WC tool with 6% cobalt [11], but they are
not suitable for all applications. Hence, tool life and surface
finish have to be compromised. Several attempts have been
made to find a perfect combination of speed, feed, and depth
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article
(doi:10.1007/s00170-017-0307-0) contains supplementary material,
which is available to authorized users.
* Sisira Kanta Pattnaik
sisirakantapattnaik@yahoo.co.in
1
Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology, Jyoti Vihar,
Sambalpur, Odisha 768018, India
Int J Adv Manuf Technol
DOI 10.1007/s00170-017-0307-0

2. of cut for surface quality during machining of aluminum and its
alloys [12].The surface hardness of cemented carbide tools was
enhanced by applying coatings, and multilayer tri-component
coating Ti (C, N) is a very popular one. It shows combined
properties, high hardness of TiC and high ductility of TiN
[13–16]. Polycrystalline diamond (PCD) tools are the better
alternative, in comparison to different multilayer coated tools
due to their unique diamond-like properties [17, 18]. Moreover,
several studies are conducted on the relationship between cut-
ting forces and tool wear of PCD inserts while machining alu-
minum composite [19, 20]. Chemical vapor-deposited (CVD)
diamond-coated carbide is very much popular nowadays; it is
the advancement of the PCD tool and CVD tools and also can
be adopted as a suitable alternative [21, 22]. Study of chip
produced during machining is an important aspect, as it directly
influences the cutting force and surface integrity [23, 24]. The
surface texture in a machining process directly influences the
quality of the product as well as its cost which is directly influ-
enced by several parameters such as the machine tool, cutting
conditions, and property of the material [25].
2 Literature review
A good number of research papers are reported in the field of
machining of aluminum, at various cutting conditions in re-
cent years. Also, excellent efforts were made to improve the
cutting condition. This section presents various previous
works reported on machining, parameter optimization, rough-
ness analysis, chip morphology, and force measurement.
Lee et al. [26] machined Al-Si alloy using a single crystal
diamond tool for economical production. In his investigation
for tool life, the cutting parameter and extraction rate of Si
particle is taken into consideration. Aluminum composites were
machined by Celho et al. [27]. He used three different cutting
tools (HSS, WC, and PCD) and performed series of operations
turning, face milling, drilling, and tapping for investigation of
the tool life of the cutting tools. Uhlman et al. [28] used CVD-
coated diamond tools to machine Al-Si alloy to analyze the
influence of residual stress on coating quality and tool life. He
performed a wear test to find out the performance of the tool
and the influence of the residual stress of the tool life. Liew et al.
[29] proposed that by applying vapor lubricant, the friction
between the rake face of the tool and the chip can be minimized.
He maintained a controlled low-pressure gas environment. The
tribological behavior of the tool and workpiece were analyzed
and discussed. 2024 Al alloy composite reinforced with Al2O3
particles is machined and its parameters were optimized by Kok
[30]. He used K10 and Tp30 carbide tool for machining. He
controlled the surface roughness optimizing the cutting speed,
size, and volume fraction of particles. Manna and Bhattacharya
[31] optimized the cutting parameters (speed, feed, and depth of
cut) and its effect on the cutting forces. He also investigated the
effect of cutting parameters on tool wear as well as surface
finish and established a relation among them. He used alumi-
num metal matrix composite (Al/Sic-MMC) as the work mate-
rial and uncoated tungsten carbide (WC) as the tool material for
machining. Narahari et al. [32] has made an attempt to evaluate
machining of eutectic Al-Si(LM 6) and hypoeutectic Al-Si(LM
25) alloys using HSS and WC at various cutting parameters
(speed, feed, and depth of cut). He found that the WC tool
had a longer life at all cutting conditions compared to the
HSS tool, which was very much expected. He also proposed
that by applying cutting fluid, the tool life of both the cutting
tolls was increased by 10–20%. Gangopadhaya et al. [33] ap-
plied MoSx-based composite solid lubricant coating on a WC
cutting tool for machining. He conducted a performance test by
turning AlSiMg aluminum alloy and IS80C6 high carbon steel
and found that by applying lubricant coating, crater wear on the
rake face of the tool can be minimized. Sornakumar and
Kathiresan [34] used an HSS end-milling tool for machining
plain aluminum alloy and aluminum alloy-silicon carbide com-
posite. They found that the wear of the end-milling tool was
higher during machining of aluminum alloy-silicon composite
than the plain aluminum alloy. They conducted several exper-
iments at a different speed and feed and found that the surface
finish is better at high speed and low feed. Wanger et al. [35]
established a relationship between the coating condition and
chip morphology, during the milling operation of aluminum.
The cutting condition includes different cutting parameters
(speed, feed, depth of cut) in both wet and dry conditions. He
used Emulsion Quakercool 700 Alf 8% as cutting fluid at a
pressure of 8 bar. Whereas the chip morphology includes chip
length, chip thickness, and chip formation.
From the literature, several things can be noticed. Some
researchers used only two or three different tools for compari-
son, so there is an adequacy in comparison. Some advised for
using lubricant%cutting fluids, which definitely increase the ma-
chining cost. It also creates an unhealthy environment, so the
economical point of view of dry machining is always advisable.
Some researchers compared two different work materials using
the same tool! It is obvious that harder/more abrasive material
causes more wear on the tool. Some researchers emphasize on
mathematical modeling and optimization, but simultaneously
at the experimental analysis point of view, they are lagging.
Some compared HSS with advanced cutting tools, whereas
the comparison should be among the advanced cutting tools.
Analyzing these lacunas, it has inspired me to proceed with my
research work by choosing a single work material and using
five different advanced cutting tools for proper selection of tool
material. In this paper, attempts have been made to develop a
good cutting condition for machining of rolled aluminum
which is very popular and commonly used in industries. The
surface roughness of the work material and tool wear are taken
into consideration, and suitable cutting parameters have been
intended to be established.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

3. 3 Experimental setup and procedure
3.1 Material and method
A cylindrical bar of rolled aluminum of 190 mm diameter and
460 mm length was selected for experimental work. The ex-
perimental tests were performed using heavy duty capstan and
turret lathe (Make Czechoslovakia; model: TYP R5; serial
no.: 450940039). The photographic view of the experimental
setup is shown in Fig. 1. Before machining, the turning oper-
ation is performed to maintain a uniform diameter and to re-
duce the margin of errors. The description of the cutting tool
holder, workpiece and different machining parameters are de-
scribed in Table 1 and Table 2 respectively.
After machining, the tool insert was cleaned in ultrasonic
etching at a frequency range of 45–50 Hz for 30 min. All cutting
tool inserts were first etched using trichloroethylene for 10 min,
2-proponal for 10 min, then acetone for 10 min. The chip
underface at VC = 336 m/min, f = 0.045 mm/rev;
VC = 426 m/min, f = 0.06 mm/rev; and VC = 540 m/min,
f = 0.09 mm/rev for constant depth of cut cutting condition
was tested in SEM. The surface roughness measurement has
been done using a portable stylus-type profile meter, Talysurf
(surtronic S – 128 series) at three different locations of the ma-
chined component. Their average value was plotted for Ra value.
During machining, the chips were collected for a constant ma-
chining duration for analysis purpose. The images of the chip
produced at each experimental run were captured to get the
information regarding the shape, size, and color of the chip.
3.2 Cutting tool characterization
The tool insert crystal plane was characterized using X-ray
diffraction analysis (model: Shimadzu, XRD – 7000L, Japan).
All cutting tools were tested under the continuous mode of
2 deg/min scan speed and with a sampling pitch of 0.0200 deg.
3.2.1 Characterization of WC (tungsten carbide)
X-ray diffraction pattern of WC substrate showed different peaks
at a different glancing angle. They were (001), (100), (100),
(100), (111), (112), and (201) planes at angles 31.30, 36.70,
48.40, 64.300, 73.80, 77.80, and 89.50 respectively (Fig. 2a).
3.2.2 Characterization of WC + TiN
The X-ray diffraction pattern of the WC + TiN cutting tool
showed the peaks at 38.030, 44.180, 64.460, and 77.670
indexed to the diffraction from (111), (200), (300), and (222)
planes respectively (Fig. 2b).
3.2.3 Characterization of WC + Ti (C, N) + Al2O3
The X-ray diffraction pattern multilayer cutting tool showed
the peaks at 38.03°, 44.18°, 64.460°, and 77.670° indexed to
Fig. 1 Photographic view of the experimental setup
Table 1 description of the
cutting tool and tool holder Cutting tool number Cutting tool material Designation Tool holder
1 Cemented carbide SPGN120308 CSBL 2525M 12
2 SPUN120308 CSBL 2525M 12
3 Cemented carbide + PVD TiN SNGA120408 PR 4035 PSBNR 2020 K12
4 Cemented carbide CVD MT-Ti
(C, N) + TiN + Al2O3
SNMG 120408 PR 4235 PSBNR 2020 K12
5 Polycrystalline diamond (PCD)
brazed on cemented carbide
(K-10) insert
SPUN 120304 FP CD 10 CSBPL 2525M 12
Table 2 Description of the workpiece and different machining
parameters
Workpiece material Rolled aluminum
Composition 100% aluminum
Dimension Φ 190 × 460 mm
Cutting speed 336, 426, 540 m/min
Feed 0.045, 0.06, 0.09 mm/rev
Depth of cut 0.2 mm
Cutting environment Dry
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

4. the diffraction from (111), (200), (300), and (222) planes re-
spectively (Fig. 2c).
3.2.4 Characterization of PCD (polycrystalline diamond)
In this insert, the PCD tip is brazed at the cutting edge of the
WC tool insert. The X-ray diffraction pattern shows the peak
at 44.180, 64.690, and 77.670 and the peaks at different planes
were (111), (211), and (220) respectively. This shows the
diamond-like property (Fig. 2d).
4 Results and discussion
4.1 Study of surface roughness and chip deformation
The surface roughness of the machined component greatly af-
fects the performance and lifespan of the manufactured prod-
uct. The surface finish of the turned product was affected by the
feed rate and tool nose radius. Larger tool nose radius geometry
will be superior to that of that smaller tool nose radius. This is
because a larger nose offers a smaller plan approach angle having
the pressure of cut distributed across a longer cut length, creating
an enhanced surface texture [36, 37].
The roughness of the machined surface measured at three
different places and their average value were plotted for com-
parison between different tool materials. With the increase in
speed, the roughness value increases for lower feed except for
that of the PCD tool (Fig. 3a–c).
From Fig. 3a–c, we can observe that in each graph speed is
constant, whereas the feed is varied and average roughness
values (Ra) are considered. The first tool which is WC-SPGN
provides an average roughness value at all conditions irrespective
of speed and feed. In the case of the second tool (WC SPUN)
which is having a coarse grain and produces a better surface
finish at high speed and low feed, the surface roughness is max-
imum at high speed and high feed. The PVD TiN-coated WC
tool produces an average roughness at low and medium speed
(i.e., Vc = 336 and 426 m/min), but at higher speed (540 m/min),
the surface roughness increases. The multicoated tool (WC + Ti
Fig. 2 XRD images of cutting tool inserts. a WC insert; b WC + TiN; c WC + Ti (C, N) + Al2O3; d PCD
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

5. (C, N) + Al2O3) produces an average surface finish at low speed
and low feed (0.045 mm/rev.). The surface roughness is maxi-
mum at medium speed and low feed, but at higher speed, it
produces an average roughness value. The PCD tool provides
an expected result, i.e., better surface finish at higher speed and
low feed.
In Fig. 4a–c, we kept the feed constant and plotted the
roughness values with varying speed in increasing order.
Both WC SPUN and WC SPGN produce an average
roughness at all conditions, but the roughness is increased
when the speed and feed are increasing. In the PVD TiN-
coated WC tool, a similar pattern can be observed. In a
multicoated tool, a large variation in surface roughness
can be observed at medium speed and low feed. But the
surface roughness is less at high speed and high feed. In the
case of the PCD tool, the surface roughness is less at low
feed, but when the feed rate increases, the roughness also
increases simultaneously.
4.2 Tool wear analysis
On a single-point turning tool insert, the main regions of wear
were normally confined to the rake face, flank, and trailing
clearance face, together with the actual nose radius. Likewise,
the type of wear pattern provides important information as to
the effectiveness of the overall machining operation. A range
of factors can influence tool wear when component machin-
ing; these are material removal rate, efficient chip control,
machining economics, and precision and accuracy demanded,
plus the machined surface texture requirements. The tool wear
occurred due to the machining of each tool for each experi-
ment was 56 s. A total of nine experiments were carried out, so
the machining time for each tool was 8.4 min. From the SEM
images, the following results were observed.
Figure 5a shows the tool wear and spectrum of the elements
present at the wear and non-wear part of the tool. In the case of
the WC SPGN tool, a very small amount of wear was observed;
Fig. 3 Surface roughness after machining at a constant speed, constant depth of cut with varying feed. a Vc = 336 m/min; b Vc = 426 m/min; c
Vc = 540 m/min
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

6. this is because of a finer grain of the SPGN crystal structure and
higher cobalt content in it which make the tool more wear
resistant [38]. Near to the nose part of the tool, some percentage
of aluminum reacts with the rake part, although it was 86 per-
centages less than the SPUN. The various elements present at
the wear part of the tool were CaCO3, SiO2, MgO, Al2O3, Co,
and W by weight percentage of the amount of 6.85, 6.80, 1.50,
11.03, 2.28, and 71.47 respectively. Figure 6a shows the wear
spectrum for the WC SPGN tool. Figure 5b shows the tool
wear and element present in the wear part of the WC SPUN
tool. Aluminum reacts with the rake surface and the formation
of 83.45 by weight percentage was found close to the nose
radius. Some other elements like CaCO3, SiO2, MgO, and Ag
were also found by weight percentage in the amounts 11.87,
2.78, 0.59, and 0.99 respectively. Some part of aluminum also
reacted away from the rake face and was found at a very less
amount of 3.18 by weight percentage. In the rake face of the
tool, some materials are eroded due to high temperature gener-
ated during the machining process because of lesser toughness
and the wear resistance property of the materials [38]. Figure 6b
shows the wear spectrum for the WC SPUN tool. Figure 5c
shows the tool wear and various elemental spectrum analyses
for the WC + TiN tool. In the case of the TiN-coated tool, some
part of aluminum is sticking at the rake face. At the corner
radius, the aluminum chipped away some coated part, although
it is very less in amount due to wear resistance and having the
good antifriction property of TiN coating. For the long run, TiN
coating may not be fit for turning of non-ferrous alloy due to
wear and may be torn out of the corner radius and edge part.
Figure 6c shows the wear spectrum of the WC + TiN tool.
Figure 5d shows the wear of the WC + Ti (C, N) + Al2O3
cutting tool and spectrum for the element present in the wear
part and on-wear part of the tool. Here in this condition maxi-
mum, part of the aluminum was deposited on the nose part
which was welded to the rake surface. From the spectrum of
the wear part, it was observed 84 by weight percentage. From
the spectrum, some other elements, such as CaCo3, SiO2, MgO,
and Ag, were also found by the amounts of 11.19, 2.58, 0.51,
and 1.07 respectively by weight percentage. Figure 6d shows
the wear spectrum of the WC + Ti (C, N) + Al2O3 tool.
Fig. 4 Surface roughness after machining at a constant feed and constant depth of cut with varying speed. a f = 0.045 mm/rev; b f = 0.06 mm/rev; c
f = 0.09 mm/rev
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

7. Figure 5e shows the wear and the spectrum of the element
present in the PCD cutting tool. In the case of PCD, a very
small amount of wear was observed on the rake face; there was
no BUE or BUL in the tool. In the wear zone of PCD, various
types of the element were present such as wollastonite, albite,
MAD-10, feldspar, potassium chloride, silicon di-oxide, mag-
nesium oxide, and calcium carbonate by the amounts of 0.17,
0.32, 0.17, 0.19, 11.11, 0.21, and 78.733 by weight percentage.
A very small amount of deformation of the surface in this case
due to its unique wear-resistant and high-temperature-resistant
nature. Figure 6e shows the wear spectrum of the PCD tool.
4.3 Chip underface
A study of the chip underface showed the variation of feed
marks, cracks developed during the machining process.
During dry, turning of AA 6005 alloy was compared for
different speeds ranging from 200 to 1000 m/min for CVD and
PCD tools showing the various abrasive marks in the chip [39].
On a comparative study of the behavior of different coated and
non-coated tools, the diamond tool showed the best chip sliding
as compared to others [40]. Here, three different conditions (low,
medium, high feed and speed combination) were tested to know
the behavior of the deformation of the chip. During machining,
formation of the discontinuous chip is always desirable. But as
we know, aluminum is a ductile material so the continuous-type
chip is produced, which is very undesirable. So friction occurs
between the rake surface of the tool (near the nose) and the
underface of the chip, due to which destruction or damage occurs
at the chip underface and wear occurs on the tool. More destruc-
tion means more friction between the chip and the tool, which
directly affects the tool life. Less chip destruction indicates that
there is less friction between the tool and chip which are coming
out during machining. By comparing Fig. 5 and Table 3, we can
Fig. 5 a–e Tool wears of
different tool
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

8. Fig. 6 a WC SPGN wear part
EDS spectrum. b WC SPUN
wear part EDS spectrum. c WC +
TiN wear part EDS spectrum. d
WC + Ti (C, N) + Al2O3 wear part
EDS spectrum. e PCD wear part
EDS spectrum
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

9. Table 3 SEM picture showing the underface of the chips after machining of aluminum by different coated and non-coated tools
1
2
3
4
5
Condition VC=336 m/min, f= 0.045
mm/rev, d= 0.2 mm
VC=426 m/min, f= 0.06
mm/rev, d= 0.2 mm
VC=540 m/min, f= 0.09
mm/rev, d= 0.2 mm
Tool
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

10. clearly understand the effect of chip destruction on tool life. In
tool 1 (WC SPGN) at a lower speed, more chip underface de-
struction is observed compared to medium and high speeds, so a
considerable tool wear can be noticed from Fig. 5a. In the case of
WC SPUN, tool inserts at all the speed chip underfaces are
damaged so maximum wear can be observed in tool 2 in
Fig. 5b. While considering the third tool (WC + TiN) except at
lower speed in both the cases the chip underfaces are smooth. So
the least wear was accrued in the tool and it is shown in Fig. 5c.
In the case of the multicoated tool {WC + Ti (C, N) + Al2O3} at
medium and high speeds, the chip underface was damaged very
badly, so destruction at the nose of the tool clearly can be pointed
out at Fig. 5d. Finally, while using a PCD tool, a chip with
smooth interfaces is produced at all cutting speeds. So negligible
tool wear occurred on the tool shown in Fig. 5e. At lower speed
and feed, more cracks appeared in all the four cutting tools (i.e.,
1–4), but in the PCD tool, smooth feed marks were produced and
no crack marks appeared. As the feed and speed increase, the
crack generation on the face reduces except in the PCD tool
which showed much smoother feed marks at higher speed and
feed condition. Table 3 shows the various feed marks and micro
cracks present on the chip underface.
5 Conclusion
The experiments were carried out to find out the relative be-
havior of surface roughness and tool wear produced during
machining of rolled aluminum using five different cutting
tools at a different speed and feed at a constant depth of cut
condition in a dry machining environment. From the experi-
ment, we can conclude that the surface integrity produced by
the PCD tool was found to be better than another type of
cutting tool inserts for high-speed machining.
The tool wear generated during machining is least in the
case of the PCD and WC SPGN tools. So for the machining of
rolled aluminum, the WC SPGN and PCD tools should be
preferred but in the case of WC, the SPGN tool deteriorates
faster than the PCD.
Study of EDS showed that the coated layer of the TiN and Ti
(C, N) + Al2O3 tool chipped away with aluminum and some part
of aluminum is welded near the nose and the coating layer is
almost removed. Study of chip underface showed that in the case
of PCD the cracks and voids generated are minimum than other
tools so PCD gives promising results than other types of tool.
References
1. Hovsepian PE, Luo Q, Robinson G, Pittman M, Howarth M,
Doerwald D (2006) TiAlN / VN superlattice structured PVD coat-
ings: a new alternative in machining of aluminium alloys for
aerospace and automotive components. Surf Coatings Technology
201:265–272
2. Luo Q, Robinson G, Pittman M, Howarth M, Sim WM, Stalley
MR, Leitner H, Ebner R, Caliskanoglu D, Hovsepian PE (2005)
Performance of nano-structured multilayer PVD coating TiAlN/VN
in dry high speed milling of aerospace aluminium 7010-T7651.
Surf. Coatings Technology 200:123–127
3. Sanchez JM, Rubio E, Álvarez M, Sebastián MA, Marcos M (2005)
Microstructural characterisation of material adhered over cutting
tool in the dry machining of aerospace aluminium alloys. J.
Mater. Process. Technology 164-165:911–918
4. Kishawy HA, Dumitrescu M, Ng E, Elbestawi MA (2005) Effect of
coolant strategy on tool performance, chip morphology and surface
quality during high-speed machining of A356 aluminum alloy. Int.
Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45:219–227
5. Gomaz-Parra A, Alvarez-Alcon M, Salguero J, Batista M, Marcos
M (2013) Analysis of the evolution of the built-up edge and built-up
layer formation mechanisms in the dry turning of aeronautical alu-
minium alloys. Wear 302:1209–1218
6. Carrilero MS, Bienvenido R, Sanchez JM, Alvarez MA, Gonzalez
A, Marcos M (2002) A SEM and EDS insight into the BUL and
BUE differences in the turning processes of AA2024 Al–Cu alloy.
Int. Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42:215–220
7. Sreejith PS, Ngoi BKA (2000) Dry machining: machining of the
future. J. Mater. Process. Technology 101:287–291
8. Ni H, Elmadagli M, Alpas AT (2004) Mechanical properties and
microstructures of 1100 aluminum subjected to dry machining.
Material science & Engineering 385:267–278
9. Abou-el-hossein K, Olufayo O, Mkoko Z (2013) Diamond tool
wear during ultra-high precision machining of rapidly solidified
aluminium RSA 905. Wear 302:1105–1112
10. List G, Nouari M, Gehin D, Gomez S, Manaud JP, Le Petitcorps Y,
Girot F (2005) Wear behaviour of cemented carbide tools in dry
machining of aluminium alloy. Wear 259:1177–1189
11. Kouadri S, Necib K, Atlati S, Haddag B, Nouari M (2013)
Quantification of the chip segmentation in metal machining: appli-
cation to machining the aeronautical aluminium alloy AA2024-
T351 with cemented carbide tools WC-Co. Int. Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture 64:102–113
12. Bhushan RK, Kumar S, Das S (2010) Effect of machining param-
eters on surface roughness and tool wear for 7075 Al alloy SiC
composite. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technology 50:459–469
13. Chen L, Wang SQ (2008) Microstructure and mechanical properties
of Ti ( C, N ) and TiN / Ti ( C, N ) multilayer PVD coatings. Int J
Refract Met Hard Mater 26:456–460
14. Ruppi S, Hogrelius B, Huhtiranta M (1998) Wear characteristics of
TiC, Ti(C,N), TiN and A1203 coatings in the turning of conventional
and Ca-treated steels. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 16:353–368
15. Nordin M, Sundstrom R, Selinder TI, Hogmark S (2000) Wear and
failure mechanisms of multilayered PVD TiN/TaN coated tools
when milling austenitic stainless steel. Surf. Coatings Technology
133-134:240–246
16. Fallqvist M, Olsson M, Ruppi S (2007) Abrasive wear of multilayer
K-Al2O3-Ti(C,N) CVD coatings on cemented carbide. Wear 263:
74–80
17. Ding X, Liew WYH, Liu X (2005) Evaluation of machining per-
formance of MMC with PCBN and PCD tools. Wear 259:1225–
1234
18. Da Silva RB, MacHado AR, Ezugwu EO, Bonney J, Sales WF
(2013) Tool life and wear mechanisms in high speed machining
of Ti-6Al-4Valloy with PCD tools under various coolant pressures.
J. Mater. Process. Technology 213:1459–1464
19. Davim JP, Baptista AM (2000) Relationship between cutting force
and PCD cutting tool wear in machining silicon carbide reinforced
aluminium. J Mater Process Technology 103:417–423
Int J Adv Manuf Technol

11. 20. Arsecularatne JA, Zhang LC, Montross C (2006) Wear and tool life
of tungsten carbide, PCBN and PCD cutting tools. Int. Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture 46:482–491
21. Heaney PJ, Sumant AV, Torres CD, Carpick RW, Pfefferkorn FE
(2008) Diamond coatings for micro end mills: enabling the dry
machining of aluminum at the micro-scale. Diamond & Related
Mat 17:223–233
22. Arumugam PU, Malshe AP, Batzer SA (2006) Dry machining of
aluminum – silicon alloy using polished CVD diamond-coated cut-
ting tools inserts. Surf. Coatings Technology 200:3399–3403
23. Sutter G (2005) Chip geometries during high-speed machining for
orthogonal cutting conditions. Int. Journal of Machine Tools &
Manufacture 719–726.
24. Su G, Liu Z, Li L, Wang B (2015) Influences of chip serration on
micro-topography of machined surface in high-speed cutting. Int.
Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 89:202–207
25. Zhang SJ, To S, Wang SJ, Zhu ZW (2015) A review of surface
roughness generation in ultra-precision machining. Int. Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture 91:76–95
26. Lee ES (2000) A study on the economics of hypereutectic
aluminium-silicon (Al-Si) alloy machining. Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technology 16:700–708
27. Coelho RT, Yamada S, le Roux T, Aspinwall DK, Wise MLH
(1993) Conventional machining of an aluminium based SiC rein-
forced metal matrix composite (MMC) alloy. Proceedings of the
Thirtieth International MATADOR Conference, 125–133
28. Uhlmann E, Reimers W, Byrne F, Klaus M (2010) Analysis of tool
wear and residual stress of CVD diamond coated cemented carbide
tools in the machining of aluminium silicon alloys. Prod Eng Res
Devel 4:203–209
29. Liew WYH, Hutchings IM, Williams JA (1998) Friction and lubri-
cation effects in the machining of aluminium alloys. Tribol Lett 5:
117–122
30. Kok M (2011) Modelling the effect of surface roughness factors in
the machining of 2024Al/Al2O3 particle composites based on or-
thogonal arrays. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technology 55:911–920
31. Manna A, Bhattacharya B (2005) Influence of machining parame-
ters on the machinability of particulate reinforced Al/SiC–MMC.
Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technology 25:850–856
32. Narahari P, Pai BC, Pillai RM (1999) Some aspects of machining
cast Al-SiCp composites with conventional high speed steel and
tungsten carbide tools. J Mater Eng Perform 8:538–542
33. Gangopadhya S, Acharya R, Chottopadhya AK, Poul S (2010) On
deposition and characterisation of MoS x -Ti multilayer coating and
performance evaluation in dry turning of aluminium alloy and steel.
Proceedings of the 36th International MATADOR Conference 247–
250
34. Sornakumar T, Kathiresan M (2010) Machining studies of die cast
aluminum alloy-silicon carbide composites. International Journal of
Minerals Metallurgy and Materials 17:648–653
35. Wagner V, Vissio A, Duc E, Pijilat M (2016) Relationship between
cutting conditions and chips morphology during milling of alumin-
ium Al-2050. Int J Adv Manuf Technology 82:1881–1897
36. Rech J, Moisan A (2003) Surface integrity in finish hard turning of
case-hardened steels. Int Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture
43:543–550
37. Bartarya G, Choudhury SK (2012) State of the art in hard turning.
Int Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 53:1–14
38. Edwards R (1993) Cutting tool technology. The Institute of
Materials, London
39. Gangopadhyay S, Acharya R, Chattopadhyay AK, Sargade VG
(2010) Effect of cutting speed and surface chemistry of cutting tools
on the formation of Bul or Bue and surface quality of the generated
surface in dry turning of Aa6005 aluminium alloy. Mach Sci
Technology 14:208–223
40. Roy P, Sarangi SK, Ghosh A, Chattopadhyay AK (2009)
Machinability study of pure aluminium and Al – 12% Si alloys
against uncoated and coated carbide inserts. Int J Refract Met
Hard Material 27:535–554
Int J Adv Manuf Technol