Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Manufacturing Processes

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/manpro

On the mechanism and mechanics of wheel loading in grinding T

Sanjay Agarwal
Department of Mechanical Engineering, BIET, Jhansi, India

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Accumulation of chips in the space between grains of grinding wheel, called wheel loading, has detrimental
Wheel loading effects in industrial grinding operations, such as wheel life reduction, higher cutting forces and power re-
Inconel 718 quirement and variations in tolerance during process. It is also important for process optimization, monitoring,
Surface integrity and control. So wheel loading study should be done based on fundamental and applied concept so that required
productivity and desired surface integrity can be achieved. This is possible by the fundamental understanding of
the grinding wheel loading at microstructural scale and establishing the relationship of grinding characteristics
and wheel loading. So the present study investigates, the wheel loading mechanism and its evaluation via new
analytical model while grinding Inconel 718 superalloy with CBN grinding wheel, considering workpiece ma-
terial adhesion on the surface of abrasive grain, cutting parameters, process temperature, wheel structure and
material properties. This study provides valuable insights into the grinding wheel loading mechanism and the
associated mechanics.

1. Introduction
Grinding process is an important precision machining method for
high surface finish applications, such as biomedical engineering, aero-
space engineering, automobile engineering, electronic engineering, etc.
This is a typical machining process, in which complex interactions takes
place between the irregular shaped grinding grains with the workpiece.
During grinding operation, chips formed may stick to abrasive grains or
weld on to grains cutting edges. The adhered chips disturb the grinding
ability of wheel resulting to increased grinding force and temperature
resulting in wheel chatter or thermal damage of the workpiece. So, in
order to meet the demand of productivity and desired surface integrity,
the fundamental understanding on the mechanism of wheel loading at
microstructural scale and its evaluation quantitatively by developing an
analytical expression is essential.
In grinding process, the actual wheel-workpiece contact area con-
sists of large number of asperities which undergoes plastic deformation
followed by adhesion at the junctions thereby forming microwelds
under high temperature and high stress. Due to this phenomenon, the
wheel becomes dull very fast, raising grinding forces and temperature
thus reducing its grinding ability [1]. The phenomenon is supposed to
be one of the most disturbing factors in grinding process, and an im-
portant criterion for redressing of grinding wheels [2].
In grinding process, many studies have been conducted to not only
to understand the many aspects of wheel loading mechanism but also to
investigate the loading phenomenon under various parameters like
wheel speed, cutting depth, and work-piece feeding speed [3–6], but no
significant loading was found at low cutting depth [3]. However the
loading tendency increases with increase in material removal rate (ei-
ther higher depth of cut and/or higher feed [4]. In order to estimate
loading resulting from adhesion between abrasive grains and the
workpiece, a simple analysis was proposed by Srivastava et al. [5]
which contradictorily reported that feed has no significant effect on
wheel loading [5] but it is affected by the mode of grinding i.e. the
loading of CBN wheels in up-cut grinding is less than that in down-cut
grinding [6]. Now to understand the wheel loading mechanism in re-
ference to various aspects of chip formation processes, Schmaltz and
Konig [7] established that the wheel loading could be due to the me-
chanical interlocking of the chips with the wheel surface and the che-
mical affinity between the work-piece and grits materials. Further Ko-
manduri and Shaw [8] suggested that the pressure welding of ground
chips on abrasive grits could be the possible cause loading over the
wheel surface. Yossifon and Rubenstein [9] also confirmed the same
phenomenon, but added a possibility that wheel loading is determined
by the presence of protecting oxide layer on the work-piece during
grinding in air. Although CBN vitrified grinding wheels gives results
that have many applications related to porosity and structure control in
vitreous bonded wheel [10–12], but wheel is liable to loading, while
machining superalloys [13]. The loading accelerate the wheel wear,
raising the grinding forces and temperature thus reducing its grinding
ability.
In an attempt to study the effect of wheel wear on the grinding force

E-mail address: sanjay72ag@rediffmail.com.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2019.03.009
Received 5 January 2019; Received in revised form 28 February 2019; Accepted 7 March 2019
1526-6125/ © 2019 The Society of Manufacturing Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Agarwal
and ground surface quality, Xu et al. [14] conducted experiments to
compare the grinding performance of Ti2AlNb intermetallics by using
two different wheels (Green SiC and Pink alumina). The wear effect on
the grinding force and ground surface quality has been investigated.
Results indicated that Green SiC wheel gives better results as compared
to that of Pink alumina wheel in terms of adherent area on abrasive
grain, total power consumption, white layer thickness etc.. Similarly
Qian et al. [15] made a comparative investigation on the grindbility
difference of two kinds of nickel-based superalloys, i.e., equiaxed cast
nickel-based superalloy K4125 and wrought nickel-based superalloy
Inconel718. The influence of grinding parameters such as grinding
speed, workpiece speed, and depth of cut, on the grinding force,
grinding temperature, and ground surface quality were explored. The
results illustrate that under the given grinding conditions, the grind-
ability of K4125 is less than that of Inconel718. Zhou et al. [16] studied
the grinding machinability of metal matrix composites. A finite element
(FE) simulation model was used to characterize the material removal
behavior of TiCp/Ti-6Al-4 V titanium matrix composites in high-speed
grinding process, considering consecutive action of two abrasive grains.
It was found that in the material removal process of Particulate-re-
inforced titanium matrix composites (PTMCs), the brittle removal of
TiCp and the plastic removal of Ti-6Al-4V matrix would happen si-
multaneously until the reinforcing particle completely failed in the
grinding process. Finally, the FE simulation results are validated true
through the high-speed grinding experiment of PTMCs. Gu et al. [17]
conducted the grindability study using creep-feed deep grinding for
DD6 nickel-based single-crystal superalloy to gain the more in-depth
understandings, targeting grinding force, specific grinding energy,
grinding temperature, surface integrity, and wheel wear condition.
Experimental observation revealed that microcrystalline alumina
abrasive wheel generally shows more superior grinding performances in
reference to grinding force, force ratio, grinding temperature and spe-
cific grinding energy than that of brown alumina abrasive wheel
therefore result in better self-sharpness ability and longer service life in
creep-feed deep grinding of DD6 nickel-based single-crystal superalloy.
Based on the above literature review, this paper is devoted not only
to understand the mechanism of wheel loading but also to develop a
model for the estimation of wheel loading based on actual contact zone
length resulting due to elastic deflection between contacting grain and
workpiece and contact at the tiny projections present on the grain
surface and considering the stochastic nature of the grinding process
and wheel, grinding parameters, temperature etc.. The new expression
has been verified experimentally while grinding of nickel based Inconel
718 superalloy.
2. Mechanism of wheel loading
The cutting mechanics of the abrasive during grinding is shown in
Fig. 1 (a). Individual abrasive grains on the grinding wheel, interacts
with a workpiece surface (Fig. 1(b)–1(f)) and act as a cutting tools for
chip generation and material removal. Fig. 2 depicts the major geo-
metric characteristics of an active grain edge required for the cutting
process, with and without loading particles. It is well known that the
surface always contains irregularities or asperities. The actual contact
takes place only at some high asperities which have a small share of the
contacting area. This will result into plastic deformation and inter-
metallic adhesion, thereby forming cold weld contacts between the
asperities.
The mechanism of wheel loading are often described by adhesion of
work piece material to the abrasive grits, or goes into the spaces be-
tween grits in the wheel surface in grinding [18]. If the contacting in-
terface has sufficient adhesive bonding strength to oppose relative
sliding during grinding, huge plastic deformation due to dislocation will
occur in the contact area under compression and shearing. This will
result into initiation and propagation of crack. When the crack ap-
proaches the contact interface, a wear particle is formed by adhesive
37
Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47
transfer of material [19].
In the present analysis, considering a junction is formed between the
two surfaces that can break either along a path in the softer material or
harder material or at the interface (Fig. 3). Fig. 4 (a)–(c) shows two
contacting asperities A and B {on abrasive grain (hard metal) and
workpiece (soft metal) respectively} having angles δ1 and δ2 formed
between the asperity slopes and contact plane PQ. It is assumed here
that the critical shear strength of asperities A and B are K1 and K2 . If the
asperities
A and B yields plastically by the contact plane, the normal stress σ1
and σ2 and the shear stress τ1 and τ2 , at contact plane can be expressed
[20] as;
σi = Ki (θ + 2γi − 2δi + sin 2γi ) (1)
τi = Ki cos 2γi (2)
Where i = 1, 2, angles γi being the angle formed by the contact plane
and the secondary slip line on the asperities and θ (=1 + 0.5π ) is a
constant. If both the asperities yield at the same time i.e. δi = δic , in a
frictional process [6];
τfs = τi (3)
Where τfs is the frictional stress at contact plane. If the hardness of
asperities A and B are HA andHB and HA ≻HB , the hardness ratio can be
expressed as ∂ = HA HB (=KB KA) [21] under the relation H = K (π + 2)
[20], where KA and KB are their corresponding critical shear strength
as. For dry friction, K ≈ τfs [5]. So for both the asperities,
Δδc = δ1c -δ2c = f (∑ , ∂, δ2c ) where ∑ is a constant and in general δ2c <
20° [22]. The yielding asperity in friction with hardness ratio ∂ can be
found by using Δδc . If Δδ (=δ1 -δ2) > or < Δδc , σ1 < or > σ2 and only
harder or only softer asperity (either asperity A or B) would yield. This
result is shown in Fig. 5. Thus the initiation of plastic yield of the as-
perity is determined by this theory. Now a junction formed (Fig. 3) will
break following the lowest strength path i.e. either path PSQ or PRQ,
leading to the formation of an adhesive wear particle. Let path PSQ and
PRQ are having mean shear stress τ21 and τ12 , and distributed normally
with standard deviation of σ21 and σ12 , the shear stress would be τ21 ± σ21
and τ12 ± σ12 respectively. If the area of the contact (i.e. along PR) is A,
the area of contact (i.e. along PSQ) is supposed to be іA where i may
take any value. This would be true for circular junction and the shape of
wear particle formed to be hemispherical. This is in agreement with
assumption in adhesive wear analyses [23]. Thus the formation of a soft
wear particle follow the condition that shear force through path PSQ
should be less than the shear force through path PR. i.e.
iτ21 ± iσ21 < τ12 + σ12 . It is clear that even if τ12 < τ21, a wear particle
would be formed if at any contact region, the value of τ12 is high while
the value of τ21 is low [23]. Thus the shearing of a junction will take
place away from the contacting surface resulting into the formation of
an adhesive wear particle.
The adhesive wear model proposed here established a methodology
for a quantitative estimation of the adhesive material transfer during
grinding. The model discussed here provides a rationale for distin-
guishing which asperity would yield (only soft or only hard) under
given set of conditions. Thus study on the adhesive wear discussed so
far provide new understanding about the industrial grinding process
while machining super alloy like Inconel 718.
3. Theoretical analysis for grinding wheel loading
This section proposes an analytical model based on the mechanics of
wheel loading in the surface grinding process.
3.1. Single grain-workpiece material interaction and loaded volume
The schematic diagram of grinding operation (Fig. 1(a)) shows that
the asperities present on the contacting interface is responsible for
S. Agarwal Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47

Fig. 1. (a) Cutting mechanics of the abrasive in the grinding wheel during surface grinding, (c) Action of a spherical grain in grinding, (f) Failure of junction by
pulling out large lumps and transfer of materials.

Fig. 2. shows the change in the active grain geometry due to loading.
Fig. 3. shows the model of a junction in which shear occur at the contact (path
PQ), on the hard metal side (path PRQ) or on the soft metal side (path PSQ).
actual area of contact [24]. Under increased temperatures and stress,
microwelding at the junctions will occur. This is because of plastic
(d) At any instant few adhered material gets detached.
deformation of asperities and related adhesion on the grain. Now in
(e) Rate of loading of mass depends upon on the availability of work
order to quantify wheel loading, the assumptions are:
material volume at the contacting surface [26].
(f) The force acting on the grit is constant in the grinding.
(a) Any single grain has large number of micro-asperities, hence these
(g) Attrition effect around grit–workpiece contact area is insignificant
micro asperities have been assumed to be semispherical in shape,
[26].
randomly distributed throughout the grain surface.
(b) During grinding process, adhesion is caused due to the interaction
As evident, during grinding process, the microwelding takes place
between two interacting surfaces i.e. tiny cutting points on the
on the cutting workpiece surface. If Um is the contribution of every
active wheel grains and chips, resulting in exchange of metal due to
microweld in the total volume loaded/ area will be Uad = Nm. Um , where
bonding of mating surface asperities [25].
Nm in the number of microwelds presents per unit area Assuming Hm =
(c) Under high temperatures and high stress condition, deformation of
the height of the asperity that gets attached to the cutting grit, Am = the
asperities (plastic in nature) and associated adhesion at contact
area of cross-sectional of every microweld, Um will be:
results into microweld formation. This will in turn result in the
sticking of workpiece material on grain asperities and pores on the Um = Hm. Am (4)
wheel surface [5,9,11].
Where Am = constant. Now Hm may be written as [26]:

38
S. Agarwal Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47

Fig. 4. shows the three different cases of plastic yield zone of the contacting asperity; (a) ‘A’yielding (b) ‘B’yielding and (c) ‘A’& ‘B’ simultaneously yielding.
39
S. Agarwal Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47

contact is Ft0 , then the actual contact pressure, considering the actual
area supporting the load, is a measure of the hardness of the asperity
material (as shown in Fig. 1(d)) and is given by [26]:
Ft 0
K as =
Ntm. Am (6)

Where Ntm = total number of welded asperities available in the contact

portion of a grit Ag will be Ntm = Nm. Ag . The contact area of a single grit
can be geometrically obtained as Ag = πξg tm . Here, tm = undeformed
chip thickness, ξd = grain diameter. After substitution and rearrange-
ment in Eq. (6), Am can be expressed as
Ft 0
Am =
Nm. π . tm. ξg . K a (7)

If stress along contact area is distributed uniformly, Eq. (4) after

proper substitution and rearrangement can be expressed as:
K 0. Ft 0
Um =
Nm. π . tm. ξg . K a. Kw (8)
Fig. 5. Difference in critical slope angle vs. hardness ratio.
The asperity hardness Pas depends more on the bulk properties of
the softer pair of mating surfaces in addition to temperature, strain rate
Table 1 etc on the mating surface. The hardness of asperity is expressed [27] as
Wheel and workpiece material properties for experiments.
K a = K c.e−μT , where K c and α are proportionality constant and indicates
Inconel 718 CBN Wheel the dependence of asperity hardness on temperature. For a single active
3
grit with a diameter of ξd and grain penetration depth of tm, the total
Density = 8.22 gm/cm Modulus of elasticity (Es) = 70 GPa
Hardness (HV) = 87 Kg/mm2 Young’s modulus (Eg) = 925 GPa
contacting surface area of one grit At can be geometrically calculated as
Fracture toughness (KlC) = 48 MPam1/2 Poisson’s ratio of wheel (νs) = 0.33 At = tm. ξg . lg [25], where lg =grinding distance. Thus the entire tool
Modulus of elasticity Ew = 195.8 GPa Poisson’s ratio of grit (νg) = 0.24 adhesive wear volume can be expressed as:
Thermal conductivity = 6.5 Wm−1 K−1 Grit size = 126 μm
Poisson’s ratio (νw) = 0.288 Grit density = 100 K 0. Ft 0 1
Ul = Uad. At = . . lg
Kw . K c e−μT π . tm. ξg
(9)
Table 2 Now the actual grinding distance can be written as lg = λ. lc [25],
Machining parameters and their limits. where λ is the number of times a grit will make contact with workpiece
Parameters Units Notation Limits and lc is chip length.

Depth of cut μm ae 10 15 20 25
3.2. Chip thickness model
Table speed mm/s Vw 50 100 200
Wheel speed m/s Vs 20 25 30
The uncut chip thickness is an important parameter to express the
ground surface quality. The maximum undeformed chip thickness tm is
K0 the most commonly used parameter to model the grinding process. It is
Hm =
Kw (5) generally given as [28]:

Where Kw =workpiece material hardness, K0 =constant. Fig. 1(c) ae 1

tm = ⋅
shows the microwelds that takes load of normal force present on the 2Cq lc (10)
grit–workpiece contact surface. If the initial thrust force acting on the Where ae = depth of cut, q = ratio of Vs (grinding wheel surface speed)

Table 3
Experimentally observed surface roughness values under different values of parameters.
Exp. No. ae (μm) Vs (m/s) Vs/Vw Ra,experimental (μm) Ra, experimental (Average value)

1 2 3 4 5

1 10 30 400 0.162 0.165 0.160 0.166 0.165 0.163

2 10 27.5 550 0.281 0.292 0.237 0.271 0.262 0.268
3 10 25 500 0.272 0.279 0.282 0.286 0.289 0.281
4 10 22.5 450 0.321 0.333 0.347 0.323 0.321 0.329
5 10 20 400 0.334 0.348 0.358 0.342 0.323 0.341
6 15 30 300 0.229 0.232 0.214 0.235 0.212 0.224
7 15 27.5 275 0.214 0.252 0.231 0.251 0.232 0.236
8 15 25 250 0.279 0.292 0.288 0.268 0.301 0.285
9 15 22.5 225 0.312 0.341 0.309 0.351 0.328 0.328
10 15 20 200 0.369 0.359 0.387 0.418 0.421 0.391
11 20 30 150 0.212 0.221 0.208 0.221 0.209 0.215
12 20 27.5 137.5 0.315 0.269 0.268 0.325 0.311 0.297
13 20 25 125 0.317 0.329 0.328 0.341 0.332 0.330
14 20 22.5 112.5 0.336 0.371 0.375 0.381 0.348 0.363
15 20 20 100 0.366 0.388 0.392 0.399 0.414 0.392

40
S. Agarwal Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47

Fig. 6. (a) SEM micrograph of new wheel surface (b) Original image of the grinding wheel surface observed under optical microscope and (b) the processed image of
grinding wheel surface.

Fig. 7. Grinding chips with detached loaded debris (a) at magnification of 100 × and (b) magnification of 200 ×.

Table 4 actively engaged in cutting process [29], or ℓ =1/2. The ξg can be given
Average height of the detached lumps for various machining conditions. as [29]:
S. No. Vs (m/s) Vw Detached lumps height (μm) after machining ξg = 15.2M−1
(mm/s)
ae = 10 μm ae = 15 μm ae = 20 μm ae = 25 μm where M = mesh size.
1 20 200 87 91 92 93
2 25 100 92 91 92 92 3.3. Wheel-workpiece contact length (lc)
3 30 100 94 92 92 91
4 30 300 89 91 91 92 For the calculation of real contact length, Agarwal and Rao [30]
developed an analytical model as:
2 3 1 4 0.5
⎛ a a ⎞
lc = ⎜χ 2 ⎜⎛ 3 e4 ⎟⎞ + ξ 2lc + 2χξ ⎜⎛ 4e ⎟⎞ lc1 2
+ ds a e ⎟
q q
⎝ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎠ (12)
1 6 1 3
Where, χ= 2.987β′1 3 (KIC H Ew2 15 ) 6 (Kw + K g )2 (1 ξg ) ds3 ξ=
1 2
1.6 β′ (KIC H Ew2 5 )(πds C )(Kw
+ Ks )
Where q=Vs/Vw,. β′ = a constant that account for wheel topo-
graphy. KIC = fracture toughness of work material. H=Vickers hard-
ness. Ew = Young’s modulus of workpiece material. The elastic prop-
erties of the wheel (Ks), grit (Kg) and workpiece (Kw) can be obtained as:
Ki = (1 − νi2) πEi,i = s (wheel ), g (grit ), w (workpiece ) . Where Ei =
Young’s modulus and νi =Poisson’s ratio for the grinding wheel, grit
and workpiece. Now in Eq. (12), lc is affected by elastic deflection. lc =
the geometric contact length lg , where lg = ds . ae if allowance for
elastic deflection is absent. The maximum uncut chip thickness, t̄m in
Fig. 8. Schematic drawing of grinding temperature measurement. presence of elastic deflection, is given as [30]:

lg
and Vw (tangential velocity of workpiece), lc = wheel-workpiece con- tm = .tm
lc (13)
tact length, C= active grain density (mm−1). Which shows the grain
number that is involved in cutting process? It can be given as [28]: Where tm is maximum undeformed chip thickness neglecting the elastic
C = 4ℓ {ξg2 (4π 3ν )2 3} deflection and can be computed taking lc = lg in Eq. (13) and lc can be
(11)
calculated using Eq. (12).
Where ξg = diameter of spherical CBN particle. v =volume fraction of
CBN particles. f =fraction of CBN particles that actively cut the ma- 3.4. Total loaded volume for the grinding wheel
terial. CBN wheel density = 100, or volume fraction v = 1/4 [29]. It is
assumed that only 1/2 of CBN particles on the wheel surface are From Eq. (9), a single grain model can be expressed as:

41
S. Agarwal Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47

Fig. 9. Thermocouple fixation: (a) cross-section view and (b) schematic drawing.

Fig. 10. Grinding power and loading vs. material removal volume. Fig. 12. Temperature vs. material removal volume.

basic differential equation for loading process with respect to how

many times grinding passes N can be given as:
d (Uavg )
+ Ψ (Uavg ) = R
d (N ) (15)
Where Uavg = average loading over a grain. Ψ = proportionality
constant. After integration it becomes:
Uavg = R + Ωe−ΨN (16)
Ω =constant of integration can be obtained from initial conditions.
Now the loading per unit area (Uavg × C) can be expressed as:
Ul = Ul,0 e−ΨN + R (1 − e−ΨN ) (17)
where Ul,0 =initially loaded volume on wheel surface. From Fig. 1, the
radial load Ft0 coming on the grain surface is given as:
Fig. 11. Wheel loading vs. material removal volume. Fc
Ft 0 = (Fc )2 + (Ft )2 = 1 + r2
r (18)
Ul, g = R⋅N (14) where Fc and Ft are the cutting and thrust forces acting on a grain and r
is the ratio of Fc Ft . Now Fc , in terms of power P and other cutting
C.q. 1 4 5 4
Where R =
2.L..K ad . Ft 0
π 2 . ds . Kw ξd
. ( )
ae
lc . e μT and K ad = K 0 K c is the di- parameters can be given as [32]:
mensionless constant called adhesive wear coefficient [26,31]. Now as P 1
evident from the assumptions 3, 4 and 5 that the sum of rate of material Fc =
bCVs a e ds (19)
loading and amount of loaded material gets dislodged is equal to the
amount of material adhered to the single grain. So using Eq. (14), the Hence,

42
S. Agarwal Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47

Table 5
Sets of experimental data used to calculate Kad, α, and β̂ .

S. No. ae (μm) Vw (mm/s) Vs (m/s) Temperature ‘T’ (°C) Volume of material removed (mm3) Kad × 10−7 α β̂

5 25 45 70 115 170 220 290 360 440

% loading on the wheel surface

1 10 200 20 51 0.12 2.77 2.3 2.2 1.99 2.12 2.23 2.26 2.15 2.27 6.63 0.0075 5.87
2 15 100 25 79 0.14 5.23 6.9 6.1 5.89 5.68 6.12 6.24 6.25 6.33 7.72 0.0088 6.82
3 20 100 30 82 0.28 6.1 7.4 6.9 6.8 6.3 6.4 6.7 6.8 6.8 7.34 0.0087 6.81
4 25 300 30 72 0.13 5.67 6.21 4.91 3.87 4.12 3.95 3.95 4.15 4.0 6.78 0.0089 6.45

Fig. 13. Wheel loading vs. depth of cut. Fig. 15. Wheel loading vs. wheel speed.

Ul
wheel loading(%) =
π . b . ds . ℏ (23)

4. Results, experimental verification and discussion

The nickel-based superalloy Inconel 718 chosen is an alloy used in

aerospace industry. This high-temperature high-strength alloy is not
only the very difficult material to machine but also notorious for ad-
hesive wear problems during grinding. In view of the above criterion,
Inconel 718 is an interesting candidate for this research work.
Workpiece size is 20 mm × 20 mm × 5 mm, Vs = 36.6 m/sec, wheel
diameter = 250 mm, width of wheel = 19 mm. Other details of wheel
and workpiece materials are given in Table 1 and machining para-
meters and their limits are given in Table 2.
To make the grinding operation more productive and efficient,
Fig. 14. Wheel loading vs. table speed. dressing and truing operations are to be performed on the grinding
wheels. Various techniques such as conventional dressing operations
P (1 + r 2) and unconventional in process dressing operations are available and are
Ft 0 = used for the same [33,34]. The main conventional methods used for
bCr . Vs a e ds (20)
dressing are based on mechanical contact and are as follows: Abrasive
The Ul can be calculated by using Ft0 from Eq. (20) into R of Eq. Sticks and Abrasive Wheels, Disc Dressers, Diamond Dressers, and Re-
(17). Now in Eq. (17), Ψ is the proportionality constant that gives re- active Dressing. Similarly the major unconventional methods used for
moval rate of loaded metal and depends upon Fc [26]. So it can ex- dressing are based on different non-traditional machining operations
pressed as and are as follows: Electro-Discharge Machining based Dressing (EDM),
Electrolytic In-process Dressing (ELID), Electrochemical-Discharge
Ψ ∝ Fc (21) based Dressing (ECDM) and Laser based Dressing. Each one has its own
merits and demerits. One of the earlier study [34] indicated that the
Substituting the value of Fc from Eq. (19) into Eq. (10):
mechanical dressing method is widely used and is inexpensive when
P 1 compared to the unconventional methods. So in the present study, a
Ψ = βˆ.
bCVs a e ds (22) diamond dresser, which is mounted and installed on a holder, is used to
perform the dressing operation. Several studies [10,35–45] have been
Where β̂ = proportionality constant? Now if ℏ is the height of the at- conducted to get the optimum dressing parameters for CBN grinding
tached lumps then the % ratio of loaded area to wheel surface area is wheel. Based on these studies, it can be concluded that the truing is to
given as: be done using a diamond nib at a depth of cut of 5 μm, cross-feed rate of

43
S. Agarwal
Fig. 16. Comparison of theoretical (new model and the existing model, [26]) and experimental results for different depth of cuts.
Fig. 17. Comparison of theoretical (new model and the existing model, [26]) and experimental results for different table speeds.
320 mm/min, and wheel velocity of 15 m/s. Then, the wheel is to be
dressed by providing a single pass of 2 μm depth of cut. The holder is
inclined to the line passing through the centre of grinding wheel at an
angle (known as drag angle) of 10 °.
Talysurf-VI was used to measure the surface roughness at four dif-
ferent locations of the workpiece after grinding and the average values
have been reported in Table 3. The experiments are repeated five times
(Table 3). Images along the wheel’s circumference
were taken using a digital microscope and the amounts of loading
were obtained by image processing technique available in MATLAB
toolbox [46,47]. As shown in Fig. 6, the white portion shows the loaded
area that is given as:
white pixels counts
Grinding wheel loading(%) = × 100
(white + black)pixels counts (24)
Prior to each experiment, prior loading were removed by truing
with a diamond tool. Four images for every location and total six lo-
cations on the circumference across wheel width were taken. Wheel
surface topography was recorded and analyzed for density of grit [48].
The active grit density obtained was 10 grit/mm2. r for workpiece
44
Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47
material is taken as 5 [49]. The C × r is supposed to be constant for a
given wheel [48], and taken 50 here. To validation of measured values
was done the model proposed in [50,51]. Model gives the value of C as
10.23, which is same as the measured value. The height of adhered
lumps was collected and images were taken with a microscope (Fig. 7)
and then measured (Table 4). The temperature below the work surface
was recorded for each pass by a K type thermocouple [52] fitted in the
workpiece (Fig. 8). Fig. 9 (a) shows the cross-section of the thermo-
couple junction inside hole. During grinding, the thermocouple is ex-
posed (Fig. 9 (b)) to connect to the workpiece for temperature mea-
surement. The characteristic time was taken as 33 ms [53]. The
calibration was done by placing the ground thermocouple and work-
piece assembly in an ice-water at 0 °C and in boiling water at 100 °C.
After calibration, experiments were conducted and the highest tem-
perature was recorded during every grinding passes by placing the
below the workpiece surface (Fig. 9 (b)).
As evident, the effect of grinding wheel loading upon the metal
cutting process and the development of the grinding forces are of dif-
ferent nature. On the one hand, the geometric relations of some active
grain edges are changed as loading particles will build up primarily on
S. Agarwal
Fig. 18. Comparison of theoretical (new model and the existing model, [26]) and experimental results for different wheel speeds.
Fig. 19. Error presented for a different set of experiments.
or at the active grain edges. The major geometric characteristics of an
active grain edge required for the cutting process, with and without
loading particles are already shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 2 shows that for a
constant chip thickness, the cutting edge radius and the average ne-
gative rake angle will increase. Both of them result in a higher portion
of frictional force occurring in the chip formation and lead to increased
specific cutting force. The increased cutting force result, with the
number of momentary cutting edges Nm being unaffected, in a rise of
the tangential grinding force Fc and owing to the relation between
grinding force and power consumption Ps = Fc . Vs , in an increase of
power consumption. As shown in Fig. 10, the power consumption is
constant in the initial phase of the machining process and then in-
creases to a value which exceeded by almost 75% the power con-
sumption in the subsequent phase. The output enlargement from the
grinding wheel surface show the immediate relationship existing be-
tween grinding wheel loading and power consumption. While the
output in the figure reveals, in the rise phase of power consumption, a
still fairly small number of loading particles, the wheel is very heavily
loaded at maximum power. In the further course of the process, loading
and power consumption will, in view of rising wheel wear, diminish
again. The increased abrasive rate of the grinding wheel observed in the
process is already indicative of an overstraining of the wheel structure.
Such processes in the periphery of a grinding wheel impair the
45
Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47
machining result and economy of the grinding process and therefore
will have to be controlled by suitable measuring methods in order to be
avoided.
Figs. 11 and 12 shows the experimentally observed values of wheel
loading and grinding temperature for various values of volume of ma-
terial removal (Z) for given set of conditions. It could be seen from
Fig. 14 that there exist a good correlation between wheel loading
(Fig. 11), power consumption and temperature (Fig. 12). As evident
from Eq. (21) that the amount of materials loaded is affected by dif-
ferent conditions such as specification of wheel, temperature, specific
cutting energy, material of workpiece, cutting as well as on Ka and
constants μ and β̂ , where μ and β̂ are supposed to be the
factor of temperature that has impact on the wheel loading and the
loaded dislodging coefficient respectively. It can be observed from Eq.
(21) that with increase in the value of μ will result in an increase in
loading percentage and therefore can be regarded as a machinability
characteristic of the material. Similarly, the higher values of β̂ results
into the increased dislodging rates thereby results into smaller loading
growth rates. In order to evaluate these quantities, a minimum root-
mean-square error method is used which requires comparison between
the experimental results (Table 5) and the predicted results under the
different conditions like grinding passes, machining parameters etc..
The average values of Ka, μ and β̂ thus obtained were used to estimate
S. Agarwal
Fig. 20. Surface roughness presented against table speed at various depths of
cut.
amount of wheel loading theoretically under different grinding condi-
tions.
In order to analyze loading behavior under steady-state condition,
the relationships between loading and different machining parameters
are shown in Figs. 13–15, respectively. It could be seen from the Fig. 13
that wheel loading percentage increases as depth of cut increases. This
is because increase in ae causes tm to increase and thereby causing
higher average force/grit. Further, higher ae leads to bigger chips be-
cause of longer grit grinding length and higher temperature thereby
causing the wheel loading mechanism to happen more aggressively. It
could also be seen from the Fig. 14 that the change in table speed causes
less effect on loading. This is as desired since the depth of engagement
would be low at low table speed and thus the reduction in average force
per grain could be observed with the decrease in table speed. This is
because if depth of cut is lower; it will result in lower force/grit as more
grains will be involved during metal removal for a fixed volume of
material. However, at higher table speed, the average force per grain is
high. These contrary effects lead to have less effect of table speed on
46
Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47
loading cause. So, in order to increase the material removal rate, in-
crease in table feed is preferred rather than depth of cut. Fig. 15 shows a
graph of wheel loading vs. wheel speed. Higher wheel speeds will result
in more loading in the wheel. Since increasing wheel speed results in
decreased cutting force, it would causes an increase in the number of
contacts/grinding pass. The deviation of the wheel loading calculated
with the proposed model (Eq. (23)), as compared with wheel loading
calculated with the existing model [29] and the experimental values,
for different values of depth of cut, table speed and wheel speed, is
shown in Figs. 16–18. Figures reflect that increasing depth of cut and
feed caused wheel loading to increase. Further it has been observed
from Figs. 16–18 that the predicted results of wheel loading by new
model have high consistency with the experimental results. Further, the
wheel loading predicted by new model are closer to with experimental
results, as compared to that predicted by existing model. This predicts
the process performance more accurately.
Percentage error is an important parameter to evaluate the model
under different machining conditions under consideration (Fig. 19). It
can be observed that the overall average error is less than 8%. Initially
at low removal rate, error was higher (above the overall average error)
but error reduced to less than 4% at a removal rate of 450 mm3. This
error could be due to making approximation while determining Ka, μ
and β̂ . This is considered to be a good prediction. However, the primary
reason for reduced error in the transient phase could be due to fact that
the force working over the active grains though varying in nature.
5. Chip thickness model validation
An experimental validation of chip thickness model validation was
done by surface roughness model as in [29]:
2
t2 q ⎞
Ra = ⎜⎛ m ⎟⎞ ⎜⎛ ⎟
⎝ ae ⎠ ⎝ q + 1 ⎠ (25)
where Ra= average value of surface roughness. A series of experiments
were conducted in Table 3. The Ra was measured at three different
locations of the workpiece. Fig. 20 is a diagram of the model (given by
Eq. (13)) and existing model [29] predicted data compared with ex-
perimental results, from which a better match of present model can be
directly found. Apart from this, the model (given by Eq. (13)) is closer
to real situations, as compared to the previously developed model. This
is because the deflection of grain and workpiece by normal force will
increase contact zone length. In addition wheel is also deformed
thereby increased radius and a geometrical contact zone because of
depth of cut. Hence all the three components will cause the contact
length to increase thereby leading to higher number of grains to par-
ticipate during grinding and thus hence low depth of engagement. This
confirms that the local contact deflection strongly affects the uncut chip
thickness.
6. Conclusion
In this paper, the mechanism of wheel loading in the grinding
process has been discussed and modeled and an expression for the es-
timation of the wheel loading has been presented. The analyses reveals
that the primary wheel loading process in grinding is because of
yielding of asperity followed by adhesive wear occurs on the workpiece
surface. The reason is that the metal transfer occurs due to workpiece
material adhesion on abrasive grits as softer materials yields during
grinding. This finally contributes greatly to the wheel loading in
grinding process. Further, an adhesive wear transfer mechanics model,
based on the critical stress level, resulting in initiation and propagation
of crack, is developed. The model includes contact deflection of grit-
workpiece, its properties and other traditional cutting conditions in a
single structure. The analysis also indicates that the wheel loading
mechanism in grinding was affected by workpiece material properties.
S. Agarwal
Thus the model forms a basis for quantitative evaluation of wheel
loading in grinding process. Further the results predicted by proposed
expression shows a high consistency with the experimental results, in
comparison to existing model. This is due to the fact that wheel and
workpiece elastic properties lead to an increase in contact length and
hence lowering the real depth of cut. This information established a
new concept that the local contact deflection has an important bearing
on the wheel loading and power. In addition, model also dictates that
for a given material removal volume, wheel loading can be reduced by
keeping depth of cut and wheel speed low while high table speed. This
information reveals that the model can be effectively used for esti-
mating wheel loading quantitatively without performing expensive and
time consuming experiments. Also, the present analysis is an important
step to wheel loading characterization quantitatively via adhesive wear
mechanics, in grinding of superalloy. Thus the present study makes the
grinding process a more commercially sustainable process for industry.
References
[1] Hu KX, Chandra A. A fracture mechanics approach to modeling strength degrada-
tion in ceramic grinding processes. Trans ASME, J Eng Ind 1973;115:73–84.
[2] Konig W, Lauer Schmaltz H. Loading of the grinding wheel phenomenon and
measurement. Ann CIRP 1978;27(1):217–20.
[3] Nagaraj P, Chattopadhyay AK. On some aspects of wheel loading. Wear
1989;135:41–52.
[4] Werner PG, Schmaltz HL. Advanced application of coolants and prevention of wheel
loading in grinding. Weld J 1980;18-19:225–32.
[5] Srivastava K, Ram KS, Lal GK. A simple analysis for evaluating grinding wheel
loading. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 1988;28(2):181–90.
[6] Koshima K, Onikura H, Sakuma K. Loading phenomenon of CBN wheel in grinding
of stainless steel. J Jpn Soc Precis Eng 1992;58(7):1209–14.
[7] Lauer Schmaltz H, Konig W. Phenomenon of wheel loading mechanisms in grinding.
Ann CIRP 1980;29(1):201–7.
[8] Komanduri R, Shaw MC. Mechanism of metal build-up on aluminum oxide abrasive.
Ann CIRP 1976;25(1):191–6.
[9] Yossifon S, Rubenstein C. The grinding of workpieces exhibiting high adhesion, part
1-mechanism. Trans ASME J Eng Ind 1981;103:144–55.
[10] Chen X, Rowe WB, Cai R. Precision grinding using CBN. Int J Mach Tools Manuf
2002;42:585–93.
[11] Gift FC, Misiolek JWZ. Mechanics of loading for electroplated cubic boron nitride
(CBN) wheels during grinding of a nickel-based superalloy in water-based lu-
bricating fluids. J Tribol 2004;126:795–801.
[12] Jackson MJ, Davis CJ, Hitchiner MP, Mills B. High-speed grinding with CBN
grinding wheels—application and future technology. J Mater Process Technol
2001;110:78–88.
[13] Cai R, Rowe WB, Morgan MN. The effect of porosity on the grinding performance of
vitrified CBN. Key Eng Mater 2003;238:295–300.
[14] Xi X, Yu T, Ding W, Xu J. Grinding of Ti2AlNb intermetallics using silicon carbide
and alumina abrasive wheels: tool surface topography effect and ground surface
quality. Precis Eng 2018;53:134–45.
[15] Qian N, Ding W, Zhu Y. Comparative investigation on grindability of K4125 and
Inconel 718 nickel-based superalloys. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2018;97:1649–61.
[16] Zhou H, Ding W, Liu C. Material removal mechanism of PTMCs in high-speed
grinding when considering consecutive action of two abrasive grains. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 2019;100:153–65.
[17] Gu Y, Li H, Du B, Ding W. Towards the understanding of creep-feed deep grinding of
DD6 nickel-based single-crystal superalloy. Int J Adv Manuf Technol
2019;100:445–55.
[18] Shaw MC. Crookall R, Suh Nam P, editors. Principles of abrasive processing. Oxford
series on advanced manufacturing. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996. ed.
M.C.S. 1.
[19] Modern tribology handbook, Volume one principles of tribology. Boca Raton
London New York Washington, D.C., ©: CRC Press; 2001.
[20] Green AP. The plastic yielding of metal junctions due to combined shear and
pressure. J Mech Phys Solids 1954;2:197–211.
[21] Hill R. The mathematical theory of plasticity. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1950. p.
218–9.
[22] Kayaba T, Kato K. The Adhesive Transfer of the slip-tongue and the wedge. A S L E
47
Journal of Manufacturing Processes 41 (2019) 36–47
Trans 1981;24:164–74.
[23] Rabinowicz E. Friction and wear of materials. New York: Wiley; 1965. p. 137. 161.
[24] Yin X, Komvopoulos K. An adhesive wear model of fractal surfaces in normal
contact. Int J Solids Struct 2010;47:912–21.
[25] Buckley DH. Surface effects in adhesion, friction, wear, and lubrication. Tribology
series vol. 5. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1981.
[26] Adibi H, Rezaei SM, Sarhan AAD. Analytical modeling of grinding wheel loading
phenomena. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2013;68:473–85.
[27] Huang Y, Liang SY. Modeling of CBN tool flank wear progression in finish hard
turning. J Manuf Sci Eng 2004;126:98–106.
[28] Agarwal S, Rao PV. Predictive modeling of undeformed chip thickness in ceramic
grinding. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2012;56:59–68.
[29] Malkin S. Grinding Technology, Theory and applications of machining with abra-
sives. Chichester: Ellis Horwood Limited; 1989.
[30] Agarwal S, Rao PV. Predictive modeling of undeformed chip thickness in ceramic
grinding. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2012;56:59–68.
[31] Younis MA, Alawi H. Probabilistic analysis of the surface grinding process. Trans.
CSME 1984;8(4):208–13.
[32] Xu HHK, Jahanmir S, Ives LK. Effect of grinding on strength of tetragonal zirconia
and zirconia toughened alumina. Mach Sci Technol 1997;1(1):49–66.
[33] Din W, Li H, Zhang L, Xu J, Fu Y, Su H. Diamond wheel dressing: a comprehensive
review. J Manuf Sci Eng 2017;139. 121006-1-121006-25.
[34] Srivastava UM. Review of dressing and truing operations for grinding wheels. Int J
Eng Sci Technol 2013;5(1):8–19.
[35] Rabiey M, Walter C, Kuster F, Stirnimann J, Pude F, Wegener K. Dressing of hybrid
bond CBN wheels using short-pulse fiber laser. Strojniški vestnik- J Mech Eng
2012;58:7–8. 462-469.
[36] Chen X. Strategy for the selection of grinding wheel dressing conditions. A PhD
thesis submitted to Liverpool John Moores University for the degree of doctor of
philosophy. 1995. April.
[37] De Oliveira JFG, De Purquerio BM, Coelho RT, Bianchi EC. Grinding process
dominance by means of the dressing operation. Proceedings of the 29th It.
MATADOR Conference. 1992. p. 547–50.
[38] Dhawan UP, Sachdev AS, Rao URK. Power measurement as a criterion for appro-
priate selection of grinding conditions. 12th AIMTDR Conference, IIT Delhi, Tata
McGraw-Hill Pub. Co. Ltd. 1986:343–6.
[39] Pande SJ, Lal GK. Effect of dressing on grinding wheel performance. Int J Mach Tool
Des Res 1979;19:171–9.
[40] Matsui S, Tamald J. Effect of dresser type on the surface topography of grinding
wheel. Bull Japan Soc Precision Eng 1986;20(2):135–7.
[41] Lindsay RP. Dressing and its effect on grinding performance. Am Soc Tool Manuf
Eng 1969:69–568. Technical Paper, MR.
[42] Rowe WB, Chen X, Morgan MN. The identification of dressing strategies for optimal
grinding wheel performance. Proceedings of the 30th It. MATADOR Conference.
1993. p. 195–202.
[43] Pacitti V, Rubenstein C. The influence of the dressing depth of cut on the perfor-
mance of a single point diamond dressed alumina grinding wheel. Int J Mach Tool
Des Res 1972;12:267–79.
[44] Pattinson EJ, Chishoim AWJ. The effect of dressing techniques on grinding wheel
wear. Proc. Int. Conf. on Manufacturing Technology. A. S. T. M. E., Univ. of
Michigan. 1967. p. 601–16.
[45] Adibi Hamed, Rezaei SM, Sarhan Ahmed AD. Grinding wheel loading evaluation
using digital image processing. J Manuf Sci Eng 2014;136(1). 011012-1-
011012-10.
[46] Feng Z, Chen X. Image processing of grinding wheel surface. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 2007;32:27–33.
[47] Lachance S, Bauer R, Warkentin A. Application of region growing method to
evaluate the surface. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2004;44:823–9.
[48] Cai R, Rowe WB. Assessment of CBN wheels for precision grinding. Int J Mach Tools
Manuf 2004;44:1391–402.
[49] Marinescu ID, Hitchiner M, Uhlmann E, Rowe WB, Inasaki I. Handbook of ma-
chining with grinding wheels. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis; 2007.
[50] Zhang Z, Huo F, Zhang X, Guo D. Fabrication and size prediction of crystalline
nanoparticles of silicon induced by nanogrinding with ultrafine diamond grits. Scr
Mater 2012;67:657–60.
[51] Zhang Z, Song Y, Huo F, Guo D. Nanoscale material removal mechanism of soft-
brittle HgCdTe single crystals under nanogrinding by ultrafine diamond grits. Tribol
Lett 2012;46:95–100.
[52] Guo C, Wu Y, Varghese V, Malkin S. Temperatures and energy partition for grinding
with vitrified CBN wheels. Ann CIRP 1999;48:247–50.
[53] Xu XP, Malkin S. Comparison of methods to measure grinding temperatures. J
Manuf Sci Eng 2001;123:191–5.