Effect of metallurgical parameters on the drilling and tapping characteristics of aluminum cast alloys

  • H. Barakat
  • Y. Zedan
  • A. M. Samuel
  • H. W. Doty
  • S. Valtierra
  • F. H. SamuelEmail author


The present study was performed on an Al-6% Cu-0.7%Si alloy, and 319 and 356 alloys following different heat treatments. The main task was to evaluate the drilling and tapping characteristics of the Al-Cu alloy with respect to the Al-Si-based 319 and 356 alloys. The drilling work was carried out on a Huron K2X8five CNC machine at 15,000 rpm with continuous cooling to absorb the heat and to clean the holes from the chips formed during the drilling operation. The results show that the addition of Si coupled with T6 aging treatment produces the highest cutting forces (about 360 N) among the alloys studied (approximately 270 N) after 2500 holes. Considering the Al-Cu-based alloys, varying the aging treatment has practically no significant bearing on the cutting forces. Apparently, a high Cu content acts as a self-lubricant, facilitating the drilling process up to 2700 holes, with no sign of tool wear. However, due to the low level of Si in the Al-Cu-based alloy, built up edge (BUE) is more frequent, with conical chips, which would affect the precision of the size of the drilled hole. The chips are normally dull and characterized by their rough surfaces compared to those obtained from A356.0 alloy. Tapping of the drilled holes was carried out using Guhring 971 H6 M6 6HX- HSSE taps. The HT200-based alloys revealed excellent machinability with no sign of tool wearing after 2500 holes. In contrast, the tool failed after 1600 holes in the case of 356 alloy and 2160 holes for 319 alloy. Thus, it is concluded that the presence of 3.5% Cu in the 319 alloy helped in reducing the severity of wearing due to eutectic Si particles. However, the tapping forces reached 120 N prior to failure compared to about 75 N in the case of T200-based alloys.


Al-Cu alloys Drilling Tapping BUE Cutting forces Tool wearing 



The authors would like to thank Amal Samuel for enhancing the figures and images in the present article.


  1. 1.
    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 Mater 27:535–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guru PR, Khan F, Panigrahi SK, JanakiRam DG (2015) Enhancing strength, ductility and machinability of an Al–Si cast alloy by friction stir processing. J Manuf Process 18:67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pattnaik SK, Bhoi NK, Padhi S, Sarangi SK (2018) Dry machining of aluminum for proper selection of cutting tool: tool performance and tool wear. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 98(1–4):55–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ye H (2003) An overview of the development of Al-Si-alloy based material for engine applications. J Mater Eng Perform 12:288–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nur Akmal Hakim Bin Jasni (2013) Cutting performance of advanced multilayer coated (TiAlN/AlCrN) in machining of AISI D2 hardened steel, Master’s thesis, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barzani MM, Sarhan AAD, Farahany S, Singh R, Maher I (2015) Investigating the machinability of Al–Si–Cu cast alloy containing bismuth and antimony using coated carbide insert. Measurement 62:170–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fang N, Wu Q (2005) The effects of chamfered and honed tool edge geometry in machining of three aluminum alloys. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(10):1178–1187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Garza Elizondo GH (2010) Machinability of Al-(7-11%)Si casting alloys, M. Eng. Thesis, UQAC, Chicoutimi, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tash M (2005) Effect of metallurgical parameters on the machining behavior of 356 and 319 alloys (drilling and tapping study), PhD Thesis, UQAC, Chicoutimi, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garza-Elizondo GH, Samuel E, Mohamed AMA, Samuel AM, Samuel FH, Alkahtani SA (2011) Evaluation of data-processing of drilling forces and moments in aluminum-silicon casting alloys, in 41st International Conference on Computers & Industrial Engineering 2011 Los Angeles, California, USA, 23–25 October 2011. Los Angeles, California. pp. 1081–1086Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Demir H, Gündüz S (2009) The effects of aging on machinability of 6061 aluminium alloy. Mater Des 30:1480–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Soares RB, de Jesus AMP, Neto RJL, Chirita B, Rosa PAR, Reis A (2017) Comparison between cemented carbide and PCD tools on machinability of a high silicon aluminum alloy. J Mater Eng Perform 26(9):4638–4657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Santos MC Jr, Machado A, Sales WF, Barrozo M, Ezugwu EO (2016) Machining of aluminum alloys: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 86:3067–3080. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pucella G, Samuel AM, Samuel FH, Doty HW, Valtierra S (1999) Sludge formation in Sr-modified Al-11.5 Wt% Si diecasting alloys. AFS Trans 107:117–125Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zedan Y (2010) Machinability aspects of heat-treated Al-(6–11)% Si cast alloys: role of intermetallics and free-cutting elements, PhD Thesis, UQAC, Chicoutimi, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hamed M (2019) Paramètres de fraisage pour les alliages coulées Al-Cu et Al-Si Cast, M. Eng. Thesis, UQAC, Chicoutimi, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mohamed AMA, Samuel FH (2012) A review on the heat treatment of Al-Si-Cu/Mg Casting Alloys. In: Heat treatment: conventional and novel applications. p 229Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Samuel AM, Doty HW, Valtierra S, Samuel FH (2017) New method of eutectic silicon modification in cast Al–Si alloys. Int J Met 11(3):475–493Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Elsharkawi EA, Abdelaziz MH, Doty HW, Valtierra S, Samuel FH (2018) Effect of β-Al5FeSi and π-Al8Mg3FeSi6 phases on the impact toughness and fractography of Al–Si–Mg-based alloys. Int J Met 12:148–163Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sood PK, Sehgal R, Dwived DK (2017) Machinability of hypereutectic cast Al–Si alloys processed by SSM processing technique. Sadhana 42:365–378Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Uhlmanna E, Flögela K, Sammlera F, Riecka I, Dethlefsa A (2014) Machining of hypereutectic aluminum silicon alloys, 6th CIRP International Conference on High Performance Cutting, vol. 14, pp. 223–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ahmed YS, Fox-Rabinovich G, Paiva JM, Wagg T, Veldhuis SC (2017) Effect of built-up edge formation during stable state of wear in AISI 304 stainless steel on machining performance and surface integrity of the machined part. Materials 10:1230. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Oliaei SNB, Karpat Y (2016) Investigating the influence of built-up edge on forces and surface roughness in micro scale orthogonal machining of titanium alloy Ti6Al4V. J Mater Process Technol 235:28–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Barakat
    • 1
  • Y. Zedan
    • 2
  • A. M. Samuel
    • 1
  • H. W. Doty
    • 3
  • S. Valtierra
    • 4
  • F. H. Samuel
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Département des Sciences appliquéesUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiChicoutimiCanada
  2. 2.Département de génie mécaniqueÉcole de technologie supérieureMontrealCanada
  3. 3.General Motors Materials EngineeringPontiacUSA
  4. 4.Nemak, S.A.Garza GarciaMexico

Personalised recommendations