Journal of Materials Shaping Technology

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 161–169 | Cite as

Development of new drill geometry and its performance evaluation

  • T. I. Liu


A new type of drill, namely, the crankshaft multifacet drill, has been developed for crankshaft drilling. Thrust has been selected as a main index for the development of this drill geometry. The crankshaft multifacet drill can reduce the thrust by 25.2% under operating conditions identical to those of the conventional split point drill. This indicates that drill life could be increased.

Under accelerated life test conditions, this new drill is capable of producing at least 25% more oilholes than would be produced by the conventional split point drill. Test results for radial force measurements, chip breaking capability, exit burr evaluation, and drill wear comparison have also been evaluated. This drill yields much better performance in all aspects than the drill currently used in industry. The crankshaft multifacet drill can not only enhance productivity but also improve hole quality as compared to the conventional split point drill.


Feed Rate Spindle Speed Flank Wear Nodular Cast Iron Wear Area 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    T.J. Drozda and C. Wick:Tool and Manufacturing Engineer’s Handbook, Vol. 1: Machining, 4th Ed., pp. 9-4–9-64, SME, 1983.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    T.I. Liu: Development of Crankshaft Multifacet Drill and On-Line Drill Wear Monitoring, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A.R. Watson:Int. J. Mach. Tool Des. Res., 1985, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    E.J.A. Armarego and J.D. Wright: Annals of the CIRP, 1984, Vol. 32/1, pp. 5–10.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Wiriyacosol and E.J.A. Armarego: Annals of the CIRP, 1979, Vol. 28/1, pp. 87–91.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    E.J.A. Armarego and C.Y. Cheng:Int. J. Mach. Tool Des. Res., 1972, Vol. 12, pp. 37–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D.F. Galloway: ASME Trans., 1957, Vol. 79, pp. 191–231.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M.C. Shaw and C.J. Oxford, Jr.: ASME Trans., 1957, Vol. 79, pp. 139–148.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Shibasaka, H. Hasimoto, K. Ueda, and K. Iwata: Annals of the CIRP, 1983, Vol. 32/1, pp. 37–41.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Söderberg and O. Vingsbo:Wear, 1982, Vol. 75, pp. 123–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. Ber and S. Kaldor: Annals of the CIRP, 1982, Vol. 31/1, pp. 13–15.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    V.C. Venkatesh and M. Satchithanandam: Annals of the CIRP, 1980, Vol. 29/1, pp. 19–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M.M. Tseng and R.A. Noujaim:ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry, 1979, Vol. 101, pp. 109–115.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    V.C. Venkatesh: ASME Trans., 1978, Vol. 100, pp. 436–441.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. Chandrasekaran and R. Nagarajan: ASME Trans., 1977, Vol. 99, pp. 566–577.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. I. Liu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringCalifornia State University-SacramentoSacramento

Personalised recommendations