Research on machining compacted graphite iron under oil-on-water cooling and lubrication conditions based on modified material model

  • Feng Ding
  • Chengyong WangEmail author
  • Haisheng Lin
  • Suyang Li
  • Lijuan Zheng
  • Qimin Wang


Oil-on-water (OoW) techniques, including external OoW sprayed to both the rake face and flank face (EOoWrf), as well as cryogenic air mixed with OoW (CAOoW), improve the machinability of compacted graphite iron (CGI). This paper proposes a modified material model for RuT400 CGI cutting, based on flow softening and weak thermal softening effect, as observed during split-Hopkinson pressure bar tests. Employing a modified material model and Cock-Latham damage model, a thermo-mechanical coupled finite element (FE) model, for RuT400 cutting, is presented. The simulations, considering dry cutting, EOoWrf, and CAOoW, are conducted for the purpose of revealing the causes for the RuT400 difficult-to-cut property and for establishing how the mechanism of OoW can improve cutting performance. The results show that the effective stress, required to form chip segments in RuT400 machining, is much lower than in hardened steel, so RuT400 is more likely to form a serrated chip. In dry cutting, the chip bottom surface is subject to high strain and temperature, leading to the work-material phase transformation, followed by aggravating adhesive and abrasive wears. Although EOoWrf has little influence on chip morphology and effective stress, it reduces the temperature and strain on chip bottom surface by reducing friction, thus suppressing the occurrence of phase transformation. Due to low friction and high heat exchange, CAOoW produces the lowest tool-chip interface temperature and minimal adhesive wear. For high-speed cutting of RuT400, compared to dry cutting, EOoWrf and CAOoW can effectively reduce cutting forces and maintain the tool temperature in a lower range, where low friction on tool-chip interface plays a key role. The proposed FE model can be used in the future to improve CGI’s machinability, by changing cooling parameters, tool geometry/material, and other machining variables.


Machining Compacted graphite iron Modified material model Finite element Oil-on-water 






Flow stress



Contact pressure



Shear stress



Frictional stress




\( {\overline{\varepsilon}}^{pl} \)

Equivalent plastic strain

\( {\dot{\overline{\varepsilon}}}^{pl} \)

Equivalent plastic strain rate


\( {\dot{\varepsilon}}_0 \)

Reference strain rate



Temperature sensitivity parameter


Strain rate sensitivity parameter


Deformation temperature



Transition temperature



Ambient temperature



Melting temperature



Surface temperature of object



Yield strength



Strain hardening strength



Strain hardening coefficient


Thermal softening coefficient


Strain rate hardening coefficient

a, b, d, r, s, t

Material constants


Fracture strain energy


Coefficient of friction


Heat transfer coefficient



Heat generation from deformation



Frictional heat generation



Heat flux



Cutting speed



Feed rate



Depth of cut



Tangential cutting force



Radial cutting force




We are grateful to Guangxi Yuchai Machinery Group Co., Ltd. for providing cast iron samples for this study.

Funding information

This study received financial supports from the Major National Science and Technology Projects in China (No. SK201901A31-04), namely Demonstration application of localization of super-hard tools for automobile engine block and cylinder head production, and the Key Program of the National Natural Science Foundation of China-Guangdong Joint Fund (Grant No. U1201245).


  1. 1.
    Sousa JAGD, Sales WF, Machado AR (2018) A review on the machining of cast irons. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 94:4073–4092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nayyar V, Kaminski J, Kinnander A, Nyborg L (2012) An experimental investigation of machinability of graphitic cast iron grades; flake, compacted and spheroidal graphite iron in continuous machining operations. Procedia CIRP 1(7):488–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abele E, Schramm B (2008) Using PCD for machining CGI with a CO2, coolant system. Prod Eng 2(2):165–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Suhaimi MA, Park KH, Yang GD, Sharif S, Kim DW (2018) Effect of cryogenic high-speed milling of compacted graphite iron using indirect spray system. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 99:2149–2157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Varghese KP, Balaji AK (2013) Effects of tool material, tool topography and minimal quantity lubrication (MQL) on machining performance of compacted graphite iron (CGI). Int J Cast Metals Res 20(6):347–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kuzu AT, Bijanzad A, Bakkal M (2015) Experimental Investigations of machinability in the turning of compacted graphite iron using minimum quantity lubrication. Mach Sci Technol 19(4):559–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kuzu AT, Wu W, Stephenson DA, Bakkal M, Hong J, Shih AJ (2016) High-throughput dry and minimum quantity lubrication drilling of compacted graphite iron. Procedia CIRP 46:87–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nakamura T, Itoigawa F, Kawata K (2005) Ecological-friendly oil film on water fog metalworking fluid. Tribol Interface Eng 48(48):475–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li WJ, Wang B, Liu YJ, Liu GZ (2014) Study on cooling and lubrication technology of oil-on-water in cutting 1Cr18Ni9Ti stainless steel. China Mech Eng 25(6):747–750Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lin HS, Wang CY, Yuan YH, Chen ZH, Wang QM, Xiong WQ (2015) Tool wear in Ti-6Al-4 V alloy turning under oils on water cooling comparing with cryogenic air mixed with minimal quantity lubrication. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 81:87–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang CY, Lin HS, Wang X, Zheng LJ, Xiong WQ (2017) Effect of different oil-on-water cooling conditions on tool wear in turning of compacted graphite cast iron. J Clean Prod 148:477–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gok A (2017) 2D numeric simulation of serrated chip formation in orthogonal cutting of AISI316h stainless steel. Mater Technol 51(6):953–956Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zang J, Zhao J, Li AH, Pang JM (2018) Serrated chip formation mechanism analysis for machining of titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4 V based on thermal property. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 98:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gok K, Sari H, Gok A, Neseli S, Turkes E, Yaldiz S (2015) Three-dimensional finite element modeling of effect on the cutting forces of rake angle and approach angle in milling. Proc Inst Mech Eng E J Proc Mech Eng 231(2):83–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gok K (2015) Development of three-dimensional finite element model to calculate the turning processing parameters in turning operations. Measurement 75:57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zong WJ, Li D, Cheng K, Sun T, Liang YC (2007) Finite element optimization of diamond tool geometry and cutting-process parameters based on surface residual stresses. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 32:666–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wu HB, Zhang SJ (2015) Effects of cutting conditions on the milling process of titanium alloy Ti6Al4V. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 77:2235–2240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mohammed WM, Ng E, Elbestawi MA (2011) Modeling the effect of the microstructure of compacted graphite iron on chip formation. Int J Mach Tool Manu 51(10):753–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mohammed WM, Ng E, Elbestawi MA (2012) Modeling the effect of compacted graphite iron microstructure on cutting forces and tool wear. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol 5(2):87–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ljustina G, Larsson R, Martin F (2014) A FE based machining simulation methodology accounting for cast iron microstructure. Finite Elem Anal Des 80(2):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sima M, Özel T (2010) Modified material constitutive models for serrated chip formation simulations and experimental validation in machining of titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V. Int J Mach Tool Manu 50(11):943–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tang DW, Wang CY, Hu YN, Yu DH, Song YX (2009) Constitutive equation for hardened SKD11 steel at high temperature and high strain rate using the SHPB technique. Proc SPIE 7522:75226B–75226B-12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sun J, Guo YB (2009) Material flow stress and failure in multiscale machining titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 41:651–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen G, Ren CZ, Yang XY, Jin XM, Guo T (2011) Finite element simulation of high-speed machining of titanium alloy (Ti–6Al–4V) based on ductile failure model. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 56:1027–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen G, Ke ZH, Ren CZ, Li J (2016) Constitutive modeling for Ti-6Al-4V alloy machining based on the SHPB tests and simulation. Chin J Mech Eng 29(5):962–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Duan CZ, Kong WS, Hao QL, Zhou F (2013) Modeling of white layer thickness in high speed machining of hardened steel based on phase transformation mechanism. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 69:59–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim DM, Bajpai V, Kim BH, Park HW (2015) Finite element modeling of hard turning process via a micro-textured tool. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 78:1393–1405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Johnson GR, Cook WH (1983) A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Ballistics. The Hague. International Ballistics Committee, Netherlands, pp 541–547Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Takuda H, Mori K, Hatta N (1999) The application of some criteria for ductile fracture to the prediction of the forming limit of sheet metals. J Mater Process Technol 95:116–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cockcroft MG, Latham DJ (1968) Ductility and the workability of metals. J Inst Met 96:33–39Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wang CY, Ding F, Tang DW, Zheng LJ, Li SY, Xie YX (2016) Modeling and simulation of the high-speed milling of hardened steel SKD11 (62 HRC) based on SHPB technology. Int J Mach Tool Manu 108:13–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lu JP, Chen JB, Fang QH, Liu B, Liu YW, Jin TF (2016) Finite element simulation for Ti-6Al-4V alloy deformation near the exit of orthogonal cutting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 85(9–12):2377–2388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bondy M, Jensen MR, Magliaro J, Altenhof W (2017) Finite element modeling of a novel cutting deformation mode of AA6061-T6 tubes employing higher order Lagrangian element formulations. Int J Impact Eng 110:288–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nayyar V, Md A, Zubayer K, Jacek AK, Lars N (2013) An experimental investigation of the influence of cutting-edge geometry on the machinability of compacted graphite iron. Int J Manuf Mater Mech Eng 3(1):1–25Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jiang F, Zhang T, Yan L (2016) Estimation of temperature-dependent heat transfer coefficients in near-dry cutting. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 86:1–12Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Filice L, Micari F, Rizzuti S, Umbrello D (2006) A critical analysis on the friction modelling in orthogonal machining. Int J Mach Tool Manu 47:709–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Fukumasu NK, Pelegrino PL, Cueva G, Souza RM, Sinatora A (2005) Numerical analysis of the stresses developed during the sliding of a cylinder over compact graphite iron. Wear 259(7–12):1400–1407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wang CY, Xie YX, Zheng LJ, Qin Z, Tang DW, Song YX (2014) Research on the chip formation mechanism during the high-speed milling of hardened steel. Int J Mach Tool Manu 79(4):31–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Feng Ding
    • 1
  • Chengyong Wang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Haisheng Lin
    • 1
  • Suyang Li
    • 1
  • Lijuan Zheng
    • 1
  • Qimin Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Manufacturing TechnologyGuangdong University of TechnologyGuangzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations