Milling parameters of Al-Cu and Al-Si cast alloys

  • M. Hamed
  • Y. Zedan
  • A. M. Samuel
  • H. W. Doty
  • F. H. SamuelEmail author


The work presented here was carried out on an Al-6%Cu-0.7%Si alloy (used in as cast, T5 and T7 aged conditions), in comparison with B319.0 (T7 by treated at the two places where treatment appears) and A356.0 (T6 treatment) alloys. Wet milling was carried out on 15 blocks of each alloy using new inserts for 120-m machining distance. A total of 75 blocks were employed. The results show that the cutting forces for the Al-Cu based alloys are not affected by the applied heat treatment. The presence of Cu in the B319.0 neutralized, to some extent, the harmful effect of the hard Si particles. Maximum cutting forces were obtained from machining the A356.0 alloy treated in the T6 condition, due to the presence of a high density of hard eutectic Si particles (~ 41500 particles/mm2), in addition to the dense precipitation of ultra-fine Mg2Si particles. Thus, the presence of 6%Cu in the Al-Cu-based alloy may act as a self-lubricant leading to much smoother finishing surfaces compared with those exhibited by B319.0 and A356.0 alloys. Similar observations were reported on the wearing of the drilling tools. Moreover, after 120-m machining distance, tiny burrs were found adhered to the outer edges of the workpiece, whereas burrs in the case of the A356.0 alloy were separated from the block.


Aluminum alloys Drilling Tool wearing Surface roughness Burr formation Chip shape 



The authors would like to thank Amal Samuel for enhancing the quality of the artwork used in the present study.


  1. 1.
    Johne P (1994) Machining of products. European Aluminium AssociationGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Toropov A, Ko KSL, Kim BK (2005) Experimental study of burrs formed in feed direction when turning aluminum alloy Al6061-T6. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45:1015–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Trent EM, Wright PK (2000) Metal cutting, 4th edn, Butterworth, p 439Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ciftci I, Turker M, Seker U (2004) Evaluation of tool wear when machining SiCp-reinforced Al-2014 alloy matrix composites. Mater Des 25:251–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Manna A, Bhattacharyya B (2002) A study on different tooling systems during machining of Al/SiC-MMC. J Mater Process Technol 123:476–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Larbi S, Djebali S, Bilek A (2015) Study of high speed machining. Procedia Eng 114:314–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Campatelli G, Scippa A (2012) Prediction of milling cutting force coefficients for aluminum 6082–T4. Procedia CIRP1, pp 563–568Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kouadri S, Necib K, Atlati S, Haddag B, Nouari M (2013) Quantification of the chip segmentation in metal machining: application to machining the aeronautical aluminium alloy AA2024-T351 with cemented carbide tools WC-Co. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 64:102–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kelly JF, Cotterell MG (2002) Minimal lubrication machining of aluminium alloys. J Mater Process Technol 327–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nouari M, List G, Girot F, Coupard D (2003) Experimental analysis and optimisation of tool wear in dry machining of aluminium. Wear 255: pp. 1359 1368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Biermann D, Heilmann M (2012) Improvement of workpiece quality in face milling of aluminum alloys. J Mater Process Technol:1968–1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Szablewski D, Dumitrescu M, Elbestawi MA, Sokolowski JH (2004) High speed face milling of a aluminium silicon alloy casting. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol 53(1):69–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Songmene V, Khettabi R, Zaghbani I, Kouam J, Djebara A (2011) Machining and machinability of aluminum alloys, Aluminium Alloys, Theory and Applications, Prof. Tibor Kvackaj (ed) ISBN: 978-953-307- 244-9, InTech publications.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Samuel AM, Doty HW, Valtierra S, Samuel FH (2017) New method of eutectic silicon modification in cast Al–Si alloys. Int J Met 11:475–493Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Florián-Algarín D, Marrero R, Li X, Choi H, Suárez OM (2018) Strengthening of aluminum wires treated with A206/alumina nanocomposites. Materials 11(2018):413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ammar HR, Samuel AM, Samuel FH, Simielli E, Sigworth GK, Lin JC (2012) Influence of aging parameters on the tensile properties and quality index of Al-9 pct Si-1.8 pct Cu-0.5 pct Mg 354-type casting alloys. Met Trans A Phys Metall Mater Sci 43:61–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    International Organization for Standardization, ISO 4287 (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Niknam SA, Songmene V (2013) Deburring and edge finishing of aluminum alloys: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 66:2029–2039CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Hamed
    • 1
  • Y. Zedan
    • 2
  • A. M. Samuel
    • 1
  • H. W. Doty
    • 3
  • F. H. Samuel
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Département des Sciences appliquéesUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiChicoutimiCanada
  2. 2.Département de génie mécaniqueÉcole de technologie supérieureMontréalCanada
  3. 3.General Motors Materials EngineeringPontiacUSA

Personalised recommendations