International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 529535

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

Effects of the friction coefficient on the minimum

cutting thickness in micro cutting
Seong Min Son*, Han Seok Lim, Jung Hwan Ahn
Mechatro Intelligence Laboratory, Department of Mechanical and Intelligent Systems Engineering,
Engineering Building #3216 Pusan National University, JangJeon-Dong, GeumJeong-Gu, Busan 609 735, South Korea
Received 20 July 2004; accepted 1 September 2004
Available online 10 November 2004

Abstract
In the ultra precision diamond cutting process, the rake angle of the tool is likely to become negative because the edge radius of tool is
considerably large compared to the sub-micrometer depth of cut. The round edge of the tool might sometimes cause plowing results in a poor
surface, or burnishing which results in a shiny surface depending on the depth of cut. This study deals with the relationship between the
friction of a tool-workpiece and the minimum cutting thickness in micro cutting. Proposed is an ultra precision cutting model in which the
tool edge radius and the friction coefficient are the principal factors determining the minimum cutting thickness with a continuous chip.
According to the model, a smaller edge radius and a higher friction coefficient make the cutting depth thinner. The experimental results verify
the proposed model and provide various supporting evidence.
q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Friction coefficient; Minimum cutting thickness; Micro cutting

1. Introduction
Ultra precision diamond cutting is an efficient manufacturing method of precision parts in various fields of the hightech industry such as electrics, electronics, information and
communication technology, biotechnology, precision
machinery, and others. Since the accuracy of diamond cut
parts is determined by the relative motion between the tool
and the workpiece, an understanding of the physical
phenomena of the micro cutting process is necessary.
Especially, an investigation of the minimum cutting
thickness is very important in order to achieve more
accurate machining. In conventional cutting, the tool edge
radius is of no concern because it is so small compared to
the depth of cut of a few millimeters. In ultra precision
cutting, the rake angle is always negative because just a
portion of the tool edge is occupied. This might cause
plowing and a poor surface, or sometimes burnishing and a
shiny surface, depending on the depth of cut.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: C82 51 510 3087; fax: C82 51 514 0685.
E-mail address: semson@pusan.ac.kr (S.M. Son).
0890-6955/$ - see front matter q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.09.001

The minimum cutting thickness in precision machining

has been studied in the different ways by several
researchers. Basuray et al. defined the blunt tool as a tiny
cylindrical surface and analyzed the transition point from
pure plowing to cutting. An approximate analysis predicted
the neutral point angle corresponding to the minimum
cutting thickness to be 37.68 [1]. Ikawa et al. estimated the
edge radius of a diamond tool using SEM and proved
experimentally that a continuous chip could be generated at
nanometer order depth of cut [2]. Lucca et al. reported that
the effects of plowing, due to a large effective negative rake
angle resulting from the tool edge radius, have become
important in micro machining. Furthermore, the cutting
thickness without a continuous chip was estimated from the
observation of the cutting force in a study on energy
dissipation in ultra precision machining [3]. Yuan et al.
presented a simple analytical expression for the minimum
cutting thickness derived from relationships between tool
sharpness, cutting force and friction coefficient [4].
This study focus on the relationship between the friction
of a tool-workpiece and the minimum cutting thickness for
the purpose of producing higher quality machined parts. In
this study, a micro cutting model is proposed, which is that

530

S.M. Son et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 529535

the tool edge radius and the friction coefficient between a

tool and a workpiece govern the minimum cutting thickness
which can produce a continuous chip. The theoretical model
indicates that a smaller edge radius and a higher friction
coefficient result in a thinner cut. The characteristics of a
cutting near the minimum cutting thickness are investigated
from the viewpoints of cutting force, resultant force
direction, surface roughness, micro hardness, and chip
shape.

Fig. 2. Differential cutting force in the elastic region.

2. Theoretical study
coefficient. From Eq. (1), the ratio of dFex/dFez is given by
2.1. Modeling of minimum cutting thickness
In ultra precision diamond cutting, the minimum
cutting thickness depends on the tool edge radius and
the physical relationship between a tool and a workpiece.
Fig. 1 shows the material behavior of a sub-micrometers
precision diamond cutting. In the case of a relatively
small cutting depth compared to the tool edge radius,
some material may be deformed, uncut, underneath the
tool. This is called plowing, and the force associated
with this is defined as the plowing force. This force is
irrelevant in macro cutting, but it becomes an important
factor in micro cutting.
In this research, it is assumed that the workpiece material
is divided into perfectly plastic and perfectly elastic regions
according to the minimum cutting thickness (Bc) as shown
in Fig. 1. Fig. 2 shows the force relationship at a depth of cut
of less than the minimum cutting thickness. The workpiece
is fully recovered after contact with a tool, and so the
differential normal force and the differential tangential force
are expressed as the following equations,

dFex
p rdqsinq C m cosq
Z e
pe rdqcosq K m sinq
dFez
p
pe rdq 1 C m2 sinq C be
p

Z
Z tanq C be
pe rdq 1 C m2 cosq C be

where be is the friction angle in a perfectly elastic region.

In case of a cutting depth of more than perfectly
elastic depth, the force model is shown in Fig. 3. The
forces on the differential element dq can be divided into
the principal force and the thrust force. The principal
force using Merchants force expression is given by
dFpx Z

dFex Z pe rdq sinq C mpe rdq cosq

(1)

Fig. 1. A proposed model of material behavior in the diamond micro

cutting.

(3)

Kts w sinq sinbp C q

dq
sinf sinf C bp C q

(4-1)

Similarly, the thrust force can be written as:

dFpz Z

where pe is the normal stress on the rounded tool edge in the

elastic region, r is the tool edge radius, and m is the friction

ts w cosbp K a
dt
sinf cosf C bp K a

where ts is the shear strength, w is the width of the tool,

bp is the friction angle in a perfectly plastic region, and
a is the rake angle, and by dtZ r sinq dq, where r is
the tool edge radius. Hence,
dFpx Z

dFez Z pe rdq cosq K mpe rdq sinq

(2)

Kts wsinqcosbp C q
dq
sinfsinf C bp C q

Fig. 3. Force model in the cutting region.

(4-2)

S.M. Son et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 529535

531

Fig. 4. Stress on the stagnation point.

Fig. 7. Simulated resultant force direction versus depth of cut.

stagnation angle or neutral angle:

dFex =dt rdq cosqc
Z 1; tanbe C qc Z cotqc
dFez =dt rdq sinqc

or

dFex =dt rdq cosqc

Z 1; tanbp C qc Z cotqc
dFez =dt rdq sinqc
Fig. 5. Simulated minimum cutting thickness.

Therefore, from Eqs. (4-1) and (4-2), the force ratio of

dFpx/dFpz is given by
dFpx
sinbp C q
Z tanbp C q
Z
cosbp C q
dFpz

(5)

Fig. 4 shows all the stresses on a differential element

under the minimum depth of cut. From the equilibrium
of forces, an equation of stagnation angle is derived, with
the shear angle f being assumed to be almost equal to

Fig. 6. Simulated cutting force versus depth of cut.

(6)

Therefore, the minimum cutting thickness is determined by




p b
K
tm Z r 1 K cos
(7)
4
2
where b is be or bp. be is the friction angle between a
tool and an un-cut workpiece passed under the tool. bp
is the friction angle between a tool and a continuous
chip. So, be and bp are equal in magnitude and opposite
in direction. It can be seen from Eq. (7) that, given
the values of the tool edge radius and the friction
coefficient, the minimum cutting thickness can be
calculated.

Fig. 8. Photograph of precision shaping machine.

532

S.M. Son et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 529535

Fig. 9. SEM photograph of diamond tool.

2.2. Simulation results

It is certain from Eq. (7) that the minimum cutting
thickness is closely related to the friction coefficient and the
tool edge radius. In general, the friction coefficient between
diamond and metals is known to be in the range of 0.050.5,
depending on the test environment [57]. Therefore, the
simulated minimum cutting thickness for such conditions
varies from 0.02 to 0.3 mm according to the surface,

as shown surface in Fig. 5. In this study, the tool edge

radius was measured to 0.5 mm using SEM, and the friction
coefficient of the tool-workpiece sets were measured
between 0.2 and 0.4. Therefore, it was expected that the
minimum cutting thickness would be 0.10.2 mm.
Cutting forces can be calculated by integrating Eqs. (1),
(4-1), and (4-2). Figs. 6 and 7 show the results of cutting
forces and the resultant force direction depending on the
friction coefficient and the cutting depth, respectively. The
vertical scale of the force in Fig. 6 is not Newton [N] but an
arbitrary unit. The simulated forces include the contributions from the plowing occurs when the cutting thickness
is less than the minimum. But the tangential force in the
actual cutting experiment was much greater than the
simulated force, because the piling-up effect of the material
in front of the tool was not included in the simulation.
In case of a 0.4 friction coefficient, the ratio of normal to
tangential force is about 0.6 at a 0.1 mm depth of cut. In the
cases of other friction coefficients, the normal to tangential
force ratios are equal to the values of the respectively
friction coefficients. The resultant force direction for the
0.20.4 friction coefficient seems to be located less than 45
degrees at a 0.2 mm depth of cut, as shown Fig. 7. This
means that the principal force is equal to or greater than the
thrust force. Therefore, stable cutting with a continuous chip
is expected at a 0.2 mm depth of cut, except with a 0.1
friction coefficient.

Fig. 10. Friction coefficient of tool-workpiece.

S.M. Son et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 529535

533

Fig. 13. Resultant force direction versus depth of cut.

Fig. 11. Principal force versus depth of cut.

3. Experimental equipment
Fig. 8 shows a photograph of the shaping machine
used in this study. The machine is composed of three
translational axes, X, Y, and Z. The X-axis is guided by
an air bearing with no friction and driven by a steel band
whereas the Y and Z axes are actuated by ballscrews.
The resolution of the Z axis having a ball reducer is
0.02 mm. The shaping machine has a semi-closed loop
control system that controls the position as well as the
federate with encoder signals.
Square-type mono crystal diamond tools with a rake
angle of 08, a clearance angle of 88, and a width of 1 mm
were used in the experiments. Fig. 9 shows a SEM
photograph of the tool edge with a radius of 0.5 mm.
Micro machinability was investigated for square
grooving under various cutting thicknesses from 0.1 to
0.5 mm at a thickness of 0.1 mm and a federated of
3 mm/s.

Fig. 12. Thrust force versus depth of cut.

4. Experimental results
4.1. Friction coefficient
A friction test was conducted to measure the friction
coefficient, which is calculated as the ratio of the tangential
force (FT) and the normal force (FN), between the workpiece and a diamond tool. Fig. 10 shows the results of the
friction test. The friction coefficient between a diamond tool
and materials such as Al, Brass, and OFHC (Oxygen Free
High Conductive copper) used in this study, are measured to
0.3, 0.2, and 0.4, respectively. Therefore, the minimum
cutting thickness can be predicted from Eq. (7) to be about
0.1, 0.12, and 0.09 mm, so a continuous chip is expected at a
0.1 mm depth of cut for OFHC and a 0.2 mm depth of cut for
Al and brass.
4.2. Cutting force
The characteristics of micro cutting were investigated for
shaping under various depth of cuts from 0.1 to 0.5 mm and a
feederate of 3 mm/s. The results of the cutting experiments
for the principal force and the thrust force are shown in
Figs. 11 and 12. All of the cutting forces are seen to increase
with the depth of cut. In Fig. 11, the slope of the principal
force for OFHC is the easiest and the magnitude is the
greatest at a 0.1 mm depth of cut, contrary to the other results
for the materials. Only in the case of OFHC is this result of
stable cutting with a continuous chip achieved. A similar
curve for the thrust force is shown in Fig. 12. The ratio of the
thrust to the principal force appear to be less than the
simulation results indicate, and this could be explained as
the piling up of material in front of the tool. It is clearer from
Fig. 13 that the principal force is increased more than the
thrust force when compared with the simulation results. The
resultant cutting force direction is increased to approximately 508 with the decrease of cutting depth. The
directions for all three materials are under 408 at a 0.2 mm
depth of cut even though that for OFHC is approximately
408 at a 0.1 mm depth of cut.

534

S.M. Son et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 529535

Fig. 14. Chip shapes and cutting force. (a) At 0.1 mm depth of cut. (b) At 0.2 mm depth of cut.

Fig. 14 shows the chip shapes and cutting force

profiles at 0.1 and 0.2 mm depths of cut. At the 0.1 mm
depth of cut, the cutting forces for Al and brass fluctuate
from 0 N to a certain force. This indicates that some
parts of the workpiece were left uncut intermittently and
that a discontinuous chip was generated, as shown in
Fig. 14(a). Contrary, the cutting force level goes up to
somewhat at the 0.2 mm depth of cut and the chip
changed into a continuous type, as shown in Fig. 14(b).
However, OFHC with 0.4 friction coefficient generated a
continuous chip even at the 0.1 mm depth of cut.

Fig. 15. Surface roughness versus depth of cut.

4.3. Quality of machined surface

The roughness of the machined surface was measured to
investigate how it was affected by the minimum cutting
thickness. It can be seen from Fig. 15 that the surface
roughness decreased with the depth of cut. At a 0.1 mm
depth of cut, the surface roughness for OFHC was the best
due to the generation of a continuous chip, which was not
achieved with the other materials. In the case of Al, a
continuous chip and the best roughness were produced only
at a minimum cutting thickness of 0.2 mm. The surface

Fig. 16. Micro hardness versus depth of cut.

S.M. Son et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 529535

roughness for brass was the best at the 0.1 mm depth of cut,
but it is supposed that this surface was produced not by
cutting but by burnishing. This is seen more clearly in
Fig. 16. The micro hardness was measured to investigate the
hardening effect of the machined surface. The hardening
effect was the smallest at the minimum cutting thickness for
all of the materials used in this experiment. It is believed
that the increase of hardening at less than the minimum
cutting thickness was caused by burnishing. This indicates
that the residual stress on the machined surface is smallest
when material is cut at the minimum cutting thickness.

5. Conclusions
In ultra precision diamond cutting, the minimum cutting
thickness was investigated theoretically as well as experimentally. The conclusions are as follows.
(1) The minimum cutting thickness was determined by the
tool edge radius and the friction coefficient of a
workpiece-tool.
(2) From the theoretical model, the minimum cutting
thicknesses were 0.090.12 mm for the three materials,
and those were almost equivalent to the experimental
results.

535

(3) When cutting at the minimum cutting thickness, a

continuous chip was generated and the surface quality
was the best.

References
[1] P.K. Basuray, B.K. Misra, G.K. Lal, Transition from ploughing to
cutting during machining with blunt tool, Wear 43 (1977) 341349.
[2] N. Ikawa, S. Shimada, H. Tsuwa, Non-destructive strength evaluation
of diamond for ultra-precision cutting tool, Annals of the CIRP. vol.
34/1/1985.
[3] D.A. Lucca, Y.W. Seo, Effect of tool edge geometry on energy
dissipation in ultraprecision machining, Annals of the CIRP. vol.
42/1/1993.
[4] Z.J. Yuan, M. Zhou, S. Dong, Effect of diamond tool sharpness on
minimum cutting thickness and cutting surface integrity in
ultraprecision machining, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 62 (1996)
327330.
[5] M.I. De Barros, L. Vandenbulcke, J.J. Blechet, Influence of
diamond characteristics on the tribological behaviour of metals
against diamond-coated Ti6Al4V alloy, Wear 249 (2001) 6878.
[6] M. Schumitt, D. Paulmier, T. Le Huu, Influence of diamond crystal
orientation on their tribological behaviour under various environments,
Thin Solid Films 343-344 (1999) (1999) 226229.
[7] J.E. Field, C.S.J. Pickles, Strength, fracture and friction properties of
diamond, Diamond Relat. Mater. 5 (1996) (1996) 625634.