Analysis of the tool nose radius influence in the machining of a green ceramic material

  • Marcos Gonçalves JúniorEmail author
  • Luiz Eduardo de Angelo Sanchez
  • Thiago Valle França
  • Carlos Alberto Fortulan
  • Rodrigo Henriques Lopes da Silva
  • Cesar Renato Foschini


Advanced ceramics are applied to several technological applications, and they have special properties. However, the advanced ceramics have poor machinability at the sintered condition, the tool suffers a high tool wear rate, which leads to material removal constraints, and they are usually machined by grinding. Further, the green state machining of advanced ceramics has been investigated as a method for the manufacturing of complex shapes, which provides an alternative for fast manufacturing of near net shape ceramic parts. Some studies have been analyzed the characteristics of green ceramics machining. Although, there are no studies that evaluated the tool nose radius effects at the machining forces and surface roughness during the turning of green ceramic parts. Besides, cylindrical compacted samples were pressed isostatically at 200 MPa, and then the workpieces are turned at constant cutting conditions using three different tool nose radius (0.05, 0.1, and 0.2 mm). The workpieces were analyzed (forces, surface roughness, and SEM images) at the green state first, sintered, and then analyzed again. The results show that the tool nose radius influences the forces, mainly the feed (Ff) and passive (Fp) forces, and there is an increase in the forces between the first and the last pass because of the tool wear. Furthermore, the workpiece offers more resistance to the axial movement than to the others, and as long as the tool wear become larger, the contact area and forces increase. In this sense, the smallest contact area leads to higher pressure and more severe wear conditions, which accelerates the tool wear. Therefore, the abrasion is the predominant wear mechanism, which was characterized by parallel grooves, orthogonal to the cutting edge. Moreover, the 0.05-mm nose radius introduced severe damages on the compact surface, which favors the pulling out of the green compact agglomerates. The increase of tool nose radius can reduce the compact surface roughness (Ra) after machining, although the best condition for tool wear was 0.1 mm. Finally, the surface finishing of the green workpiece has a direct influence on the sample after sintering, and the green state damages are conducted to the final workpiece compact.


Green ceramic Surface finishing Machining forces Nose radius 



  1. 1.
    Liu Y, Deng J, Wang W et al (2018) Effect of texture parameters on cutting performance of flank-faced textured carbide tools in dry cutting of green Al2O3ceramics. Ceram Int 44:13205–13217. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mohanty S, Rameshbabu AP, Mandal S et al (2013) Critical issues in near net shape forming via green machining of ceramics: a case study of alumina dental crown. J Asian Ceram Soc 1:274–281. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cygan T, Wozniak J, Kostecki M et al (2017) Mechanical properties of graphene oxide reinforced alumina matrix composites. Ceram Int 43:6180–6186. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Senthil Kumar A, Raja Durai A, Sornakumar T (2004) Development of alumina-ceria ceramic composite cutting tool. Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 22:17–20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Singh BK, Mondal B, Mandal N (2016) Machinability evaluation and desirability function optimization of turning parameters for Cr2O3doped zirconia toughened alumina (Cr-ZTA) cutting insert in high speed machining of steel. Ceram Int 42:3338–3350. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xing Y, Deng J, Wu Z, Cheng H (2013) Effect of regular surface textures generated by laser on tribological behavior of Si3N4/TiC ceramic. Appl Surf Sci 265:823–832. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Besshi T, Sato T, Tsutsui I (1999) Machining of alumina green bodies and their dewaxing. J Mater Process Technol 95:133–138. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li K, Liao TW (1996) Surface/subsurface damage and the fracture strength of ground ceramics. J Mater Process Technol 57:207–220. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marinescu ID (2006) Handbook of advanced ceramics machining. Taylor & Francis Group, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Agarwal S, Rao PV (2008) Experimental investigation of surface/subsurface damage formation and material removal mechanisms in SiC grinding. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 48:698–710. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Müller F, Monaghan J (2000) Non-conventional machining of particle reinforced metal matrix composite. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 40:1351–1366. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu Y, Deng J, Wu F et al (2017) Wear resistance of carbide tools with textured flank-face in dry cutting of green alumina ceramics. Wear 372–373:91–103. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Su B, Dhara S, Wang L (2008) Green ceramic machining: a top-down approach for the rapid fabrication of complex-shaped ceramics. J Eur Ceram Soc 28:2109–2115. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Margarido A, Purquerio BM, Foschini CR, Fortulan CA (2016) Influence of the green-machining parameters on the mechanical properties of alumina rods. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 10:3475–3484. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Desfontaines M, Jorand Y, Gonon M, Fantozzi G (2005) Characterisation of the green machinability of AlN powder compacts. J Eur Ceram Soc 25:781–791. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Janssen R, Scheppokat S, Claussen N (2008) Tailor-made ceramic-based components-advantages by reactive processing and advanced shaping techniques. J Eur Ceram Soc 28:1369–1379. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kumar A, Mohanta K, Kumar D, Parkash O (2014) Green properties of dry-pressed alumina compacts fabricated using sucrose as binder. Ceram Int 40:6271–6277. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Melo CC, Moraes ALI, Rocco FO et al (2018) A validation procedure for numerical models of ceramic powder pressing. J Eur Ceram Soc 38:2928–2936. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Robert-Perron E, Blais C, Thomas Y et al (2005) An integrated approach to the characterization of powder metallurgy components performance during green machining. Mater Sci Eng A 402:325–334. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bukvic G, Sanchez LEDA, Fortulan CA et al (2012) Green machining oriented to diminish density gradient for minimization of distortion in advanced ceramics. Mach Sci Technol 16:228–246. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schroeter RB, Bastos CM, Crichigno Filho JM (2007) Simulation of the main cutting force in crankshaft turn broaching. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 47:1884–1892. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mata F, Gaitonde VN, Karnik SR, Davim JP (2009) Influence of cutting conditions on machinability aspects of PEEK, PEEK CF 30 and PEEK GF 30 composites using PCD tools. J Mater Process Technol 209:1980–1987. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ng SH, Hull JB, Henshall JL (2006) Machining of novel alumina/cyanoacrylate green ceramic compacts. J Mater Process Technol 175:299–305. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maier HR, Michaeli N (1997) Green machining of alumina. Key Eng Mater 132–136:436–439. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sanchez LEA, Bukvic G, Fiocchi AA, Fortulan CA (2018) Allowance removal from green pieces as a method for improvement surface quality of advanced ceramics. J Clean Prod 186:10–21. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gonçalves Júnior M, Sanchez LE de A, Ingraci Neto RR et al (2015) Análise do acabamento superficial e força de corte no torneamento de alumina a verde. Rev Mater 20:480–490. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chang CS, Tsai GC (2003) A force model of turning stainless steel with worn tools having nose radius. J Mater Process Technol 142:112–130. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chou YK, Song H (2004) Tool nose radius effects on finish hard turning. J Mater Process Technol 148:259–268. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liu M, Takagi JI, Tsukuda A (2004) Effect of tool nose radius and tool wear on residual stress distribution in hard turning of bearing steel. J Mater Process Technol 150:234–241. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sharman ARC, Hughes JI, Ridgway K (2015) The effect of tool nose radius on surface integrity and residual stresses when turning Inconel 718™. J Mater Process Technol 216:123–132. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sheppard LM (1999) Green machining - tools and considerations for machining unfired ceramic. Ceram Ind:65–76Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yen YC, Jain A, Altan T (2004) A finite element analysis of orthogonal machining using different tool edge geometries. J Mater Process Technol 146:72–81. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Neo WK, Kumar AS, Rahman M (2012) A review on the current research trends in ductile regime machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 63:465–480. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcos Gonçalves Júnior
    • 1
    Email author
  • Luiz Eduardo de Angelo Sanchez
    • 1
  • Thiago Valle França
    • 1
  • Carlos Alberto Fortulan
    • 2
  • Rodrigo Henriques Lopes da Silva
    • 3
  • Cesar Renato Foschini
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringSão Paulo State University (Unesp)BauruBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of São Paulo (USP)Sao CarlosBrazil
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical EngineeringTechnological University of ParanáCornélio ProcópioBrazil

Personalised recommendations