Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Damage behaviors of unidirectional CFRP in orthogonal cutting: A

comparison between single- and multiple-pass strategies
Hao Nan Li a, 1, Jun Peng Wang b, 1, Chao Qun Wu b, *, Yong Jie Zhao c, Jie Xu d, Xiaoling Liu e,
Wei Qiang Zhu e
a
School of Aerospace, The University of Nottingham Ningbo China, Ningbo, 315100, China
b
School of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, 430070, China
c
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering & Mechanics, Ningbo University, Ningbo, 315211, China
d
College of Mechanical Engineering, Hunan Institute of Engineering, Xiangtan, 411100, China
e
Department of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, The University of Nottingham Ningbo China, Ningbo 315100, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastics/Polymer (CFRP) composites has experienced a rapid revolution, requiring the
CFRP accurately controllable machining technology. Although efforts have been paid on CFRP machining, most of
Orthogonal cutting them focused on the single-pass orthogonal cutting where the perfect unprocessed surfaces were employed as the
Damage behaviors
initial state. The reality is however the multiple-pass cutting with the progressive cut depths has been widely
Multiple pass
used in the industries, where the influence of the defects generated in the previous passes on the following cuts
can not be ignored. To fill this gap, this paper investigated the damage behaviors of unidirectional CFRP in
orthogonal cutting with the special emphasis on the difference between the single- and the multiple-pass stra­
tegies. The good agreement were found between the experimental and simulation results, where the maximal
relative errors were separately 10.1%, 9.2%, and 8% for fibre pull-out depth, fibre-matrix debonding depth and
cutting forces. Further discussion based on the model can draw the conclusion that, the employment of the
multiple-pass cutting strategy can improve the fibre breakage length by 40%, the fibre pull-out depth by 63%,
and the fibre-matrix interface debonding by 25%. This work is anticipated to not only open a new avenue to
provoke more in-depth thoughts of CFPR behaviors in cutting but also to provide the practical guidance for
industrial CFRP high-quality machining.

1. Introduction therefore a clear need to deepen the understanding of the cutting

Driven by the extensive applications in mobility (aerospace, marine,
and automotive) requiring high strength-to-weight ratio, Carbon Fibre
Reinforced Plastics/Polymer (CFRP) has experienced a rapid revolution
in the past two decades [1,2]. The increasing demand of high-valued and
high-performance CFRP products requires the deep understanding and
the accurate controllability of machining processes to meet dimensional
tolerance and functionality requirements [1,3]. However, the hetero­
geneity and the anisotropy of CFRP have resulted in very complicated
and challenging machinability. The presence of substantial
machining-induced damage, including matrix fracture, fibre pull-out
and burrs, and matrix-fibre debonding, has led to the poor machined
part quality and the degraded fatigue performance [4]. There is
mechanism of CFRP in the basic yet representative event, i.e. the
orthogonal cutting process of Uni-Directional CFRP (UD-CFRP) com­
posites [5]. The reported efforts were paid from (i) experimental, (ii)
analytical, and (iii) numerical aspects.
The most extensively reported work was relied on the experimental
observations. Based on the special quick stop device, not only the
machined surfaces were found rough and destroyed, but also the sub­
surfaces were featured by the massive microcracks at the fibre-matrix
interfaces if the cutting direction was perpendicular to the fibre direc­
tion [6]. This phenomena was explained based on the in-situ charge
coupled camera observation, where the out-of-plane shearing induced
by the intralaminar deformation happened during the chip formation
[7]. Another explanation can be the dynamic cutter-specimen

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: chaoqunwu@whut.edu.cn (C.Q. Wu).
1
These authors equally contributed to this work.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.107774
Received 25 June 2019; Received in revised form 9 December 2019; Accepted 15 January 2020
Available online 21 January 2020
1359-8368/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H.N. Li et al.
interaction, evidenced by the ratio of the cutting to the thrust force
showing the cyclic fashion [8]. Based on above, An et al. [9] found both
the fibre orientation and the tool geometry had little impacts on the
cutting temperature of CFRPs. An et al. [10] further stated that, the
interface layering separation was the key material removal mechanism
in the parallel fiber cutting, while in the perpendicular fiber cutting the
shear-fracture separation was the key material removal principle. With
the increasing cut depths, the occurrence of surface cavity defects was
recognised which might be resulted from either the fibre pull-out or the
propagation of the fiber-matrix debonding [4]. Unlike cut depths, high
cutting speeds can be beneficial to the machined surface quality because
of the enhanced impact effect on the easy fibre breakage [11]. The
cutting direction relative to the fibre direction (denoted as θ) also
dominated the material behaviors [12]. When θ < 90� , both the fibres
and matrices were mainly compressed, while the fibres broke mainly
due to the bending when θ > 90� .
In order to get more in-depth understanding, analytical models were
proposed as well. The orthogonal cutting forces were mathematically
modelled based on the metal cutting mechanics considering random
fibre distribution, and the good match between the calculation and ex­
periments was achieved [13]. The more reliable analytical model can be
Ref. [5], where the fibre, the matrix, and the fibre-matrix interface be­
haviors within the fibre orientation from 0 to 180 deg were mathe­
matically described based on the Euler–Bernoulli beam and Hertz
Contact theory. However, the key barriers for analytical models might
hinder this method applications, including (i) the limited capabilities to
consider the unpredicted in-process events (e.g. the matrix debonding
and the fibre pull-out), (ii) the low possibilities to investigate the
multi-physical field topics (e.g. the CFRP behaviors in the wet cutting
condition), and (iii) the poor visualisation especially for the 3D process
details.
To fill these gaps, the extensive efforts were dedicated to the Finite
Element (FE) based numerical investigations. The pioneering work can
be the macroscopic model, where the CFPR composites were described
by the Equivalent Homogeneous Materials (EHM). These models
therefore can not provide the microstructure-related information,
although the degraded material properties [14] and the diverse failure
criteria [15] were considered. The improved microscopic FE models
were suggested afterwards, where the fibres were depicted by the elastic
FEs while the matrix by the elastoplastic FEs. The cutter-CFPR crushing
effect and the bending deformation were recognised as the general
failure mode [16]. The fibre-matrix interfaces were another focus
because it closely related with debonding behaviors. The cohesive FEs
with a small thickness based on the traction-separation was proposed
and showed the good match with the experiments [17]. The
zero-thickness cohesive elements were proposed as well to be more
similar to the real microstructure, however the cohesive elements in this
Fig. 1. Schematics of the real multiple-pass cutting strategy employed in the industries.
2
Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774
method did not allow the failure under compression [16], and therefore
was improved by proposing the subroutine [18]. The machined surface
roughness was found better when θ < 90� due to the shear and crushing
induced fracture, while worse due to the bending induced fracture when
θ > 90� [19]. The various interesting phenomena were found including:
the matrix softening effect [20], the variable energy consumption
dissipated during each different failure mode [21], the strain rate
enhanced material properties [22], the defect size reduction via rotary
ultrasonic machining [23], the highly improved subsurface integrity in
low-temperature CFPR cutting [24], the increased chip thickness via the
worn cutting edge [25], the largest proportion of energy spent on
tool-chip friction [26], and the interesting tearing defect [27].
Although the availability of the above investigations, one key gap
has been still not considered yet. Most work focused on the single-pass
orthogonal cutting where the perfect unprocessed surfaces were
considered as the initial material state (see Fig. 1). However, the reality
is the multiple-pass cutting with the progressive cut depths has been
widely used in the industries. The influence of the defects generated in
the first pass can be expected significant to the next passes and thus
influential to the final surface/subsurface quality.
To fill this gap, this work investigates the damage behaviors of UD-
CFRP in orthogonal cutting with the special emphasis on the differ­
ence between the single- and multiple-pass strategy. The FE modelling
strategy is employed in order to obtain the machined defects generated
by the first pass with the full material behavior details, which were then
employed as the starting condition of the following cuts. The experi­
ments are performed to validate the model from the aspects of (i) the
machined surface morphology, (ii) the fiber breakage, the pull-out, and
the debonding depth, and (iii) the cutting and thrust forces. Based on the
model, the difference between the single- and the multiple-pass strate­
gies in terms of the fibre breakage, pull-out length, and debonding
depths is discussed. Considering very few studies investigated the CFRP
behaviors in the multiple-pass cutting, the findings in this work can be
expected to not only open an avenue to provoke more in-depth thoughts
of CFPR behaviors in cutting but also to provide the practical guidance
for industrial CFRP machining.
2. FE-based numerical methodology
2.1. Constitute models and failure criteria
The material behaviors of CFRP in cutting involve three micro­
structural components, i.e. fibres, matrices, and fibre-matrix interfaces.
Considering the bonding effect at the fibre-matrix interfaces was resul­
ted from the epoxy matrices, both the interface and the matrix would be
depicted by the same constitute model, while the fibres by another one.
H.N. Li et al. Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

2.1.1. Epoxy matrix & fibre-matrix interface Table 1

Based on the experiments [28], the epoxy matrix and fibre-matrix The material parameters employed in this study.
interface can be considered as the isotropically elastoplastic material Item Parameter Values
as depicted by Fig. 4 (a). This means, along both the tensile/compression
Carbon Elastic constants Ex ¼ 235GPa, Ex ¼ Ey ¼ 235GPa [37], νxy ¼
and the shear directions, the elastic deformation featured by the linear fiber νxz ¼ 0:2 [37], νyz ¼ 0:25 [38], Gxy ¼ Gxz ¼
stress-strain relationship and the constant Young’s modulus Ee matrix 28GPa, Gyz ¼ 5:5GPa [38]
would happen firstly with the increasing stress (see stage I in Fig. 2a and Longitudinal σT fibre ¼ 3:59GPa [16], σC fibre ¼ 3GPa [16]
Eq. (1)). When the stress is beyond the yield stress σ y matrix , the yielding strength
behaviors which can be described by Johnson-Cook model [29] occurs Epoxy/ Elastic constants Ee matrix ¼ 2:96GPa [38], υe matrix ¼ 0:4 [38],
Interface ¼ 120MPa [21]
(see stage II in Fig. 2a and Eq. (2)). When the stress is further increased
σy matrix

Johnson-cook A ¼ 120MPa [39], B ¼ 654:18MPa [40], n ¼

and becomes larger than the ultimate stress σ T matrix , the material
parameter 0:772 [40], c ¼ 0:124 [40], m ¼ 0:304 [40]
damage initiates and the Young’s modulus Ee matrix starts to degrade to
failure criteria εmatrix max ¼ 0:05 [39], uplfailure ¼ 0:02 [41], L ¼
Ed matrix according to Ed matrix ¼ ð1 dmatrix Þ*Ee matrix (see stage III in
0:4μm
Fig. 2a and Eq. (3)), where dmatrix is the damage level indicator and is
assumed to vary linearly in the range from 0 (undamaged) to 1
(completely damaged). The relevant material properties employed in
this FE model are given in Table 1.

Stage I
�
σ ¼ Ee matrix �ε when σ < σ y matrix (1)

Stage II

Fig. 2. The constitute models of (a) the isotropically elastoplastic matrix and the fibre-matrix interfaces and (b) the anisotropically elastic carbon fibres, (c) the
employed carbon fibre coordinate system, and the (d) the illustration of the both the linear and angular stress/strain in the elemental cube of the carbon fibre.

3
H.N. Li et al. Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

� �� ε_
�� �
T T0
�m �
2 3
σ ¼ A þ Bεnp 1 þ C ln 1 1 νyz νzy νyx þ νzx νyz νzx þ νyx νyz
ε_0 Tmelt T0 0 0 0 7
� � (2) 6
6 Ey Ez Δ Ey Ez Δ Ey Ez Δ 7
6 7
when σ y matrix < σ < σT matrix 6ν þ ν ν 1 νxz νzx νzy þ νxy νzx 7
6 xy zy xz 7
6 0 0 0 7
6 Ex Ez Δ Ex Ez Δ Ex Ez Δ 7
6 7
6ν þ ν ν 7
Stage III ½C� ¼ 6
6
xz xy yz νyz þ νyx νxz 1 νxy νyx
0 0 0 7
7 (7)
6 Ex Ey Δ Ex Ey Δ Ex Ey Δ 7
� 6 7
σ ¼ ð1 dmatrix Þ * Ee ε when σ > σ y
matrix � matrix (3) 6
6 0 0 0 Gyz 0 0 7
7
6 7
Despite the same constitute model, the failure criteria of the matrix 6
6 0 0 0 0 Gzx 0 7
7
4 5
and the fibre-matrix interface were found quite different based on the
0 0 0 0 0 Gxy
experimental observations [30]. The matrix failure was sensitive to the
strain especially at the increasing temperature due to the thermoplas­ � �
ticity [31], while the fibre-matrix interface failure was susceptible to the
� 1 νyz νzx �
� �
� Ex Ey Ez ��
deformation displacement because even a small displacement can be �
� �
several times of the interface thickness, disconnecting the covalent � νxy 1 νzy �� 1 νxy νyx νyz νzx νxz νzx 2νyz νxy νzx
Δ ¼ �� ¼ (8)
bonds within the epoxy microstructure [32]. Therefore the failure � Ex Ey Ez �� Ex þ Ey þ Ez
criteria of the matrix and the fibre-matrix interface were separately � �
� νxz νyz 1 ��
�
described by Eqs. (4) and (5) in this study. �E
x Ey Ez �
�
Epoxy ​ matrix ​ fails ​ if ​ MAX εmatrix x;y;z0 γmatrix yz;zx;xy � εmatrix max (4)
Stage II: The degradation stage
Matrix fibre ​ interface ​ fails ​ if ​ uinterface > L*εinterface max (5)
In the degradation stage, the strain-stress relationship can be
where εmatrix x;y;z and γmatrix yz;zx;xy are separately the linear strain along 2 3 0 1 2 30 1
the x,y,z axes of the matrix, and the angular strain within the XOY, YOZ, σx εx
ZOX planes, εmatrix max is the ultimate matrix strain, uinterface is the 6 σy 7 B
6 7 B
C 6
C 6 εy 7B
7B
C
C
6 σz 7 B C 6 εz 7B C
interface FE displacement, L is the characteristic element length (the 6 7 ¼ B1 dfibre C 6 7Bwhen σ > σ T C (9)
6 τyz 7 B C½C�6 γyz 7 B fibre C
parameter CELENT in most commercial FE packages), and εinterface max is 6 7 B
4 τzx 5 @
C 6
A 4
7B C
γzx 5@ A
the maximum equivalent plastic strain of the interface (the parameter τxy γ xy
PEEQ in most commercial FE packages).
One note is that the coordinate OXYZ in the term definition above
2.1.2. Carbon fibre referred to the fibre coordinate which was given in Fig. 2 (c), and the
Similar to the matrix, the tensile tests of carbon fibre bundles proved linear and angular strains in the ZOY plane in the elemental cube were
that fibres were elastoplastic as well [33,34]. The difference was fibres given as an example (see Fig. 2d) to show the terms defined above. The
were transversely anisotropic and the yield stress σy matrix was very close employed relevant material properties are given in Table 1.
to the ultimate stress σT fibre and therefore the plastic stage was not The failure criteria of carbon fibres was based on the maximum stress
obvious [35,36]. Based on this, the fibre behaviors in this paper were principle. This is because, the atoms in the carbon fibre microstructure
assumed to include two stages: (i) the elastic stage, where the stress and are bonded together in the microscopic crystals and more or less aligned
strain are in the linear relationship, i.e. the constant Young’s modulus parallel to the long axis of the fibre, making carbon fibres the load-
Ee fibre can be applicable (see stage I in Fig. 2b), and (ii) the degradation bearing component of CFRP [25].
stage when σ > σ T fibre , where the damage emerges and the Young’s qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi �
Fibre ​ fails ​ if ​ σ2x þ σ 2y þ σ2z � MAX σT fibre ; σC fibre (10)
modulus reduces until the material fails (see stage II in Fig. 2b). One note
is that the for anisotropic materials, the strain-stress relationships might
be different yet interrelated with each other along different directions. where σ T fibre and σ C fibre separately refer to the maximum tensile and
Therefore the constitute model of carbon fibres can be given as: compressive strength of the carbon fibres (see Table 1).

Stage I: The elastic stage 2.2. Contacts

Based on the material mechanics theory, it could have: The proposed FE-based methodology considered two different types
2 3 2 30 1 of the CFRP-cutter interactions (see Fig. 3a): (i) the compression along
σx εx the normal direction, and (ii) the friction along the tangential direction.
6 σy 7 6 εy 7B C
6 7 6 7B C
6 σz 7 6 εz 7B C
6 7 ¼ ½C�6
6 τyz 7 6
7Bwhenσ < σ T C (6) 2.2.1. Normal compression
γyz 7 B fibre C
6 7
4 τzx 5
6
4
7B
γzx 5@
C
A The compression description was implemented by the classic Pure
τxy γ xy Kinematic Master-Slave Contact Algorithm (PKMSCA) [42], where the
kinematic state of the FE model was advanced firstly and then the
where [C] is the stiffness matrix of the anisotropically elastoplastic normal contact forces were determined according to the depth of the
material as given in Eq. (7), σ x;y;z εx;y;z and Ex;y;z are separately the contact penetration and the mass associated with the process so as to
compressive/tensile stress, the linear strain, and the Young’s modulus oppose the penetration.
along x,y,z directions, τxy;yz;zx , γ xy;yz;zx , νxy;yz;zx , and Gxy;yz;zx are separately Considering this work focus was CFRP behaviors, the CFRP FEs were
set as the slave component while the tool as the master. Please note in
the shear stress, the angular strain, the Poisson ratio, and the shear
the PKMSCA, the slave node can never penetrate the master surface (see
modulus separately within the XOY, YOZ, and ZOX planes, and Δ is the
I and II in Fig. 3b) while the master node can penetrate the slave surface
variable as shown in Eq. (8).
(see III in Fig. 3b).

4
H.N. Li et al. Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

Fig. 3. (a) The schematics of the CFRP-cutter interactions including the compression along the normal direction and the friction along the tangential direction, (b)
the Pure Kinematic Master-Slave Contact Algorithm where the slave node (carbon fibre) can not penetrate the master surface (cutter) while the master node can
penetrate the slave surface, and (c) the tangential frictions featured by the stick (high compression) and the slip (low pressure) zones.

Fig. 4. (a) The 3D FE model setup of CFRP multiple-pass orthogonal cutting, (b) the detailed finite element sizes for the matrix, the interface, and the fibre, (c) the
fibre distribution, and (d) the fibre diameter and interval observed in experiments.

2.2.2. Tangential friction

The experimental observation indicated the tangential CFRP-cutter f ¼ μσn ​ when ​ μσn > τCFRP max ðin ​ the ​ stick ​ zoneÞ f
interactions include two aspects: (i) sticking (evidenced by the dust- ¼ τCFRP max ​ when ​ μσ n < τCFRP max ðin ​ the ​ slip ​ zoneÞ
like CFRP debris sticking around the tool tip [22]), and (ii) slipping (11)
(evidenced by the slipping marks on the tool rake surface [11]).
Therefore the revised Coulomb friction [43] was employed here (see Eq. where f is the friction-induced shear stress, μ is the equivalent CFRP-
(11)) cutter friction coefficient, σn is the normal compressive stress, and
τCFRP max is the ultimate shear stress of the CFRP materials and can be
approximately obtained by Eq. (12)

5
H.N. Li et al.
τCFRP max � Vfibre *τfibre þ Vmatrix *τmatrix þ Vinterface *τinterface
with the fibre, the matrix, and the interface volume percentage
Vfibre; matrix; interface and the ultimate shear stress of the fibre, the matrix,
and the interface τfibre; matrix; interface (Table 2).
2.3. FE model setup of CFRP multiple-pass orthogonal cutting
In the 3D FE model of the CFRP multiple-pass cutting (see Fig. 4a),
the cutting tool was set as the rigid body and has the same geometry with
the tool used in the validation experiments (rake angle of 10 deg,
clearance angle of 18 deg, and edge radius of 5 μm). The CFRP specimen
had the representative dimension of 300 μm (length) * 50 μm (width) *
320 μm (height). Based on the observed microstructure (see Fig. 4d), the
CFRP FE model consisted of the carbon fibres (diameter of 7 μm, in­
tervals of 11 μm and 9.5 μm separately along x and y axes), the epoxy
matrices, and the fibre-matrix interfaces (thickness of 1 μm). The CFRP
specimen was meshed by the reduced-integrated 8-noded brick elements
(C3D8R) with the enhanced hourglass control. The global element size
was chosen based on the sensitivity analysis reported in Ref. [44]. The
size refinement (1.5 μm * 1.5 μm * 1.5 μm) was performed to the ele­
ments near the cutting zone (see details in Fig. 4b). For the CFRP
specimen, all the 6� of freedom were fully constrained, while for the
cutters, the linear velocity Ux ¼ vs ¼ 5 mm/s was applied. The employed
material and contact parameters were separately given in Tables 1 and
2.
Please note that, the fibre orientation was fixed as 90 deg (perpen­
dicular to the cutting direction) in the FE model because this orientation
can enable the occurrence of diverse material behaviors [18,21],
allowing the more in-depth investigation of the previous pass influence
on the following passes in terms of fibre breakage, pull-out and
debonding. Please also note there are three cutters employed in this
study (see Fig. 4a). The multiple-pass cutting process was implemented
by the first two cutters: the first cutter cut through the full specimen
length with the cut depth ap1 of 50 μm (see route 1 in Fig. 4a), and
generated defects such as fibre breakage and debonding, after which the
second cutter cut through with the cut depth ap2 of another 50 μm
beneath the surface obtained in the first cut (see route 2 in Fig. 4a) and
generated the final machined surface. In the single-pass cutting strategy,
the unprocessed CFRP specimen was cut by the third cutter with the cut
depth ap3 of 100 μm (see route 3 in Fig. 4a).
3. Experiments
Before the discussion of the CFRP multiple-pass cutting process based
on the proposed FE model, the validation experiments were performed
first to evaluate the model accuracy.
In order to fabricate the CFRP specimens, 32 layers of prepreg plies
(made by the carbon fibres Toray T700 impregnated with the epoxy
resin Toray YPH-170) were cut to the dimension of 75 mm * 75 mm, and
placed (with the same carbon fibre orientation) in the stainless steel
mold having the hollow inner area with the size of 75 mm * 75 mm. Both
the mold and the laminates were then placed and degassed in the vac­
uum bag until the pressure reached 0.1 MPa, after which the specimen
bag was transferred to the hot presser and dwelled at 70 Celsius for 30
min so that the epoxy resin can be transformed into the gel status to
minimise the void generation. The compression pressure of 5 MPa was
Table 2
The contact parameters employed in this study.
Item Value Item
Volume Fraction Vfibre ¼ 51% Shear strength
Vmatrix ¼ 39%
Vinterface ¼ 11%
Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774
(12) then applied at the curing temperature of 180 Celsius for 120 min so that
the laminates reached the target thickness of 4 mm. Table 3 gives the
detailed mechanical properties of the fabricated CFRP specimens in the
in the dry condition at the room temperature.
Before the trials, all the surfaces were carefully polished by sandy
papers (#800, #1000 and #2000) and iteratively checked by Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM) until no defects generated during
demoulding process (such as fibre burrs, fibre-matrix debonding, and
microcracks) were observed.
As seen in Fig. 5 (d), the employed cutter was made by WC tungsten
carbide with the hardness of HRC 55 and had the rake angle of 10 deg,
the clearance angle of 18 deg, the nose radius of 5 μm, and the width of
6 mm.
Both the single- and multiple-pass cutting experiments were per­
formed on the 5-axis machine tool (Hurco VMX42SRTi) (see Fig. 5a).
The specimen was fixed by the jig while the cutter was fed in based on
the linear motion of the spindle along the –x direction (the rotation
movement of the spindle was fully constrained). The jig was mounted on
the dynamometer (Kistler 9255B) equipped with the A/D data acquisi­
tion board (National Instruments 6366) so as to capture cutting forces
with the sampling rate of 0.5 kHz.
The experimental procedures were: for the multiple-pass cutting
trials, two cutting operations were performed where the first pass cut the
specimen with the cut depth of 50 μm (see ap1 in Fig. 5b) while the
second pass cut another 50 μm (see ap2 in Fig. 5b), which was the same
as the FE simulation (see Section 2.3). Please note in the second pass, the
cutter was retracted at the midpoint of the specimen length (the point G
in Fig. 5b) because this enabled the observation and measurement of
both the machined surfaces after the first and the second pass on the
same one specimen. For the single-pass cutting, the cutter was fed into
with the cut depth of 100 μm. The cutting velocity in all the trials was
fixed as 5 mm/s while the cut width was 4 mm so as to be consistent to
the FE simulation. After the trials, both the top surfaces and the cross
sections of the machined specimens were carefully observed and
measured by the scanning electron microscope (ZEISS Sigma VP).
4. Comparison between the experimental and FE results - model
validation
4.1. Machined surface morphology from top view
Fig. 6 (a) to (f) show the comparison of the machined surface mor­
phologies from the top view between the experimental and the FE re­
sults. In the experiments, it might conclude that the cutter-specimen
interaction resulted in the fibre breakage via two mechanisms: (i) On
one hand, the cutter-fibre interaction generated the bending deforma­
tion of the carbon fibre, and therefore the high stress was generated at
the tension side of the fibre, leading to the oblique fracture surface, (ii)
on the other hand, the high shearing stress and high contact stress
concentration due to the sharp tool tip were created as well at the cutter-
fibre contact point, resulting in the smashed fibre debris and therefore
the flat fracture surfaces. Therefore the fibre fracture surfaces contained
both the oblique and the flat portions (see Fig. 6b). Similar observations
including the tilted portion at the tension side of the bending defor­
mation and the flat portion close to the cutter-specimen contact zone
(see Fig. 6d) can be clearly seen in the FE simulation as well.
Except for breakage, the fibre pull-out was also observed in both the
Value Item Value
τfibre ¼ 1500MPa [30] equivalent CFRP-cutter friction coefficient μ ¼ 0:15 [44]
τmatrix ¼ 70MPa [45]
τinterface ¼ 75MPa [46,47] CFRP shear stress τCFRP max ¼ 1500MPa [44]
6
H.N. Li et al. Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

Table 3
Mechanical properties of the fabricated CFRP specimens (measured in the dry condition at the room temperature).
Mechanical Poisson Tensile strength Tensile modulus Compression strength Compression modulus In plane shear In plane shear
properties ratio warp (MPa) warp (GPa) warp (MPa) warp (GPa) strength (MPa) modulus (GPa)

Value 0.052 667 54.6 651 53 114 4.21

Test method - ASTMD3039/D3039M-e1 ASTMD6641/D6641M-14 ASTMD3518/D3518M-94

Fig. 5. (a) The validation experiment setup, (b) the cutting tool path in the multiple-pass cutting trials, (c) the microstructure of the employed UD-CFRP specimen,
and (d) the cutter geometry with the rake angle of 10 deg, the clearance angle of 18 deg, and the nose radius of 5 μm.

experiments (Fig. 6c) and the FE simulations (Fig. 6f). This pull-out
phenomena can be probably explained by the full FE stress field evo­
lution in the time domain (see Fig. 6f): the shearing damage at the right
side of the neutral surface and the tension damage at the left side of the
neutral surface might probably simultaneously happen. Therefore the
last linkage between the fibre chip and the fibre bonded in the matrix
would be close to the neutral plane, which might generate a upward
force Fpullout and therefore result in the fibre pullout (see the moment
0.0012s in Fig. 6f).
Based on above, it might conclude that the proposed FE model has
the capability to describe the CFRP behaviors and phenomena in the
cutting process to a large extent.
4.2. Fiber breakage, pull-out, and debonding from cross section view
To further quantify the proposed FE model accuracy in terms of
describing the material behaviors, the comparison of the cross section
views between the experimental and the FE results was performed as
seen in Fig. 7.
In the first pass when the cut depth was 50 μm (see Fig. 7a and b),
both the experiments and FE simulation showed diverse fibre behaviors
including: (i) the fibre pull-out featured by the holes with the absence of
fibres (see purple arrows), (ii) the fibre-matrix debonding featured by
the loose connection at the fibre-matrix interfaces in the experiments
and the stress higher than the interface strength in the simulations (see
green arrows), and (iii) the fibre breakage featured by the fractured fibre
debris on the top of the machined surfaces. The statistical analysis of the
average fibre Pull-Out Depth (POD) and the average fibre-matrix
Debonding Depth (DD) indicated the good agreement between the ex­
periments and simulations, where the relative error was 10.1% for the
PODs while 8.8% for the DDs (see Fig. 7c).
The similar agreement in terms of PODs and DDs can be found in the
second pass in the experiments and simulations as well when the cut
depth of another 50 μm was applied after the first pass (see Fig. 7d and
e). The relative errors were 8.8% for PODs while 9.2% for DDs (see
Fig. 7f). This agreement can be considered even more encouraging in
comparison with the one in the first pass because it proved the proposed
FE model can not only capture the fibre, the matrix and the fibre-matrix
interface behaviors with the full detailed information (e.g. the geomet­
rical deformation, the mechanical stress, and the spatial position) after
the first pass, but also apply all these information as the initial state for
the second cut and predict their further behaviors in the next passes of
cutting.
4.3. Cutting/thrust forces
Except for material states after the cutting process, the experimental
and simulation cutting (the force in the horizontal direction) and thrust

7
H.N. Li et al. Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

Fig. 6. The comparison of the machined surface morphologies from the top view between the experimental and the FE results. (a) the overall, and the enlarged
experimental views showing (b) the carbon fibre fracture surface featured by the tension-induced oblique portion and the shearing- and compression-induced flat
potation, and (c) fibre pull-out phenomena, and the corresponding FE results including (d) the overall, and the enlarged views presenting the similar (e) oblique-flat-
mixed fracture surfaces, and (f) fibre pull-out, for which (g) the stress field evolution might be used to explain the occurrence mechanism.

forces (the force in the vertical direction) during the first and second
pass were compared as well as seen in Fig. 8.
It can find that, the maximal, the minimal, and the average values of
both the cutting and thrust forces measured in both the experiments and
the simulations were close to each other. Among all the twelve sets of the
comparisons, the largest relative error was 8% while the smallest one
reached 2.5%. Except for the force values, the similar fluctuating force
patterns were found in both the experiments and the simulations as well.
The peak-to-peak intervals in the time domain in the experiments were
approximately 2.2 ms and 2.2 ms separately for the cutting and the
thrust forces while 2.3 ms and 2.3 ms in the FE simulation, which were
consistent to the theoretical value of 2.2 ms considering the fibre in­
terval of 11 μm along the cutting direction and the cutting speed of 5
mm/s, proving the proposed FE model accuracy to a large extent.
5. Difference between the single and multiple pass cutting -
model application
After the model validation, the ambitious attempts based on the FE
model were performed to (i) understand the influence of the previous
cuts on the following cuts and (ii) investigate the diverse CFRP behaviors
if the single- and multiple-pass cutting strategies were applied, from the
aspects of (Section 5.1) fibre breakage/pull-out depth, and (Section 5.2)
fibre-matrix interface debonding.
5.1. Single and multiple pass difference in terms of fibre breakage/pull-
out depth
Fig. 9 (a), (b) and (c) separately show the fibre breakage and pull-out
depths after the first (with the cut depth of 50 μm from the unprocessed
surface) and the second pass (with the cut depth of another 50 μm from
the first cut surface) of the multiple cutting process, and after the single
cutting process (with the cut depth of 100 μm from the unprocessed
surface). Some findings can be recognised based on the following two
sets of the comparisons:
Comparison 1The first cut vs. the second cut in the multiple pass
strategy.
The fibre breakage lengths for the fibre 1 was 10.5 μm after the first

8
H.N. Li et al. Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

Fig. 7. The comparison of the CFRP cross sections between the experimental and the FE results. (a) The experimental and (b) FE results after the first pass with the
cut depth of 50 μm, and (c) the statistical analysis of the fibre Pull-Out Depths (PODs) and the fibre-matrix interface Debonding depths (DDs) in both the experimental
and the FE results. (d) The experimental and (e) FE results after the second pass with the cut depth of another 50 μm after the first pass, and (f) the statistical analysis
of the fibre PODs and the fibre-matrix interface DDs in both the experimental and the FE results.

cut of 50 μm (see Fig. 9d), and was reduced to 5.97 μm (by the pro­
portion of 43%) after the second cut of another 50 μm (see Fig. 9e). The
similar improvement occurred for the fibre 2, i.e. the breakage length
was 11.9 μm (see Fig. 9g) after the first cut and reduced to 8.6 μm (see
Fig. 9h) after the second cut (by the proportion of 28%). The detailed
statistical analysis of all the 108 fibres in the simulation indicated the
average improvement rate of the fibre breakage length can reach 40%
(see the comparison 1 in Fig. 9j). This implies the very interesting
conclusion that the imperfection (e.g. the fibre pull-out) generated in the
previous cut can probably be beneficial to improve the surface quality in
the following cuts. The possible explanation might be, based on CFRP
cutting force theory [48], the elementary cutting force (denoted as
dFc ðzÞ) between each individual fibre and the cutter can be expressed as
Eq. (13) when the elementary cut depth was dz.
�
dFc ðzÞ ¼ kce þ kc af dz (13)
where kce kc kte ,kt are all the coefficients relating with the cutting con­
ditions, and therefore can be considered constant for a certain case. This
implies the cutting force can be directly proportional to the cut depth. In
our case, the cut depth of the second cut (see ap2 in Fig. 9k) was designed
to be equal to the first cut depth (see ap1 in Fig. 9k). However, ap2 was in
fact reduced to ap2 real (see Fig. 9k) due to the fibre pull-out in the first
cut. Therefore the cutting force in the second cut was, not equal to, but
smaller than the first cut depth, leading to the reduced maximum
compressive or tensile stresses during the flexural deformation of the
fibres (see σt max and σ c max ) in comparison with the first pass based on
the Euler–Bernoulli beam theory (see Eq. (14)).

9
H.N. Li et al.
Fig. 8. The comparison of (a) the (horizontal) cutting force and (b) the (vertical) thrust force in both the experiments and the FE simulations during the first-pass
cutting, and the comparison of (c) the (horizontal) cutting force and (d) the (vertical) thrust force in both the experiments and the FE simulations during the second-
pass cutting.
M*rfibre Fc *x*rfibre 2x
σ t;c ¼ � ¼ *Fc ∝Fc (14)
max
IZ 0:5m*rfibre *rfibre rfibre *m
where M is the internal bending moment, rfibre is the fibre radius, IZ is the
moment of inertia of the fibre (assumed as the cylinder in this study), m
is the fibre mass, and x refers to the distance between the fixed end and
the external force.
Comparison 2: The multiple pass vs. the single pass strategy
The comparison between the multiple and the single pass strategy
can be even more interesting. The pull-out depth of 5.97 μm can be
considered as the final defect obtained in the multiple pass strategy for
the fibre 1 (see Fig. 9e), which was only 43.5% of 13.7 μm obtained in
the single cut strategy (see Fig. 9f), although the total cut depth for the
both strategies was the same. Similar observation can be found for the
fibre 2 as well, i.e. the average pull-out depth of 8.6 μm in the multiple
cutting (see Fig. 9h) was only 46.2% of 18.6 μm obtained in the single
cut strategy (see Fig. 9i). The average improvement rate of 63% in terms
of the pull-out depth can be identified for all the 108 fibres in the
simulation. It might therefore conclude that, the multiple cutting strat­
egy can provide higher possibilities to achieve better machined surface
and subsurface quality, and therefore probably better mechanical per­
formances of the CFRP components. The explanation can be the same as
above: The better surface can be obtained in the first cut in the multiple
pass strategy in comparison with the single pass because of the smaller
cut depth. Moreover, the second pass can generate better surface than
the first cut.
10
Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774
5.2. Single and multiple pass difference in terms of fibre-matrix interface
debonding
Except for fibre behaviors including breakage and pull-out, the fibre-
matrix interface debonding can be of great interest as well in the CFRP
component production. The pronounced improvement of debonding
depths can be clearly identified, where it was 9.09 μm and 17.8 μm
separately in the example 1 (see Fig.10a) and 2 (see Fig. 10d) after the
first cut, and was reduced to 6.11 μm (see Fig.10b) and 14.9 μm (see
Fig. 10e) after the second cut, which was 61.5% and 23.9% smaller than
the debonding depths of 15.9 μm (see Fig.10c) and 19.6 μm (see Fig. 10f)
obtained by the single-pass strategy. More convincing evidence of the
anti-debonding effect thanks to the employment of the multiple-pass
cutting can be the statistical analysis of all the 108 fibres in the simu­
lation (see Fig. 10g), where the average improvement ratios were
separately 25% and 47% when comparing the second cut with the first
cut and with the single-pass cutting strategy. These findings implied,
once again, the multiple-pass cutting strategy can result in less occur­
rence of debonding in the CFPR manufacturing.
The reason behind can be the reduced cut depths due to the imper­
fection after the first cut again, but was more related with the flexural
deflection of the bond structure. As seen in Fig. 10 (h), if no debonding
occurred before the current cut, the bond would have the maximum
deflection Δ1 at the free end, where Δ1 can be expressed as Eq. (15) based
on the Euler–Bernoulli beam theory.
F1 *l1
Δ1 ¼ (15)
3E*IZ
where F1 refers to the concentrated cutting force, l1 refers to the distance
between the free and the fixed end, and E refers to the Young’s modulus
H.N. Li et al. Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

Fig. 9. The cross sections of the cut CFRP specimens after (a) the first (with the cut depth of 50 μm from the unprocessed surface), (b) the second pass (with the cut
depth of another 50 μm from the first cut surface) of the multiple cutting process, and (c) the single cutting process (with the cut depth of 100 μm from the un­
processed surface), the enlarged views of the fibre 1 after (d) the first, (e) the second, and (f) the single cutting process, and of the fibre 2 after (g) the first, (h) the
second, and (i) the single cutting process, (j) the statistical analysis of the average fibre breakage length and the pull-out depths, the (k) schematics of the reduced cut
depth in the multiple-pass strategy, and (l) the mechanics analysis of the fibre based on the beam theory.

of the carbon fibre. 6. Conclusions

However, if bonds broke in the previous cuts (see Fig. 10i), the bond
structure length l2 would be reduced in comparison with l1 . Moreover,
based on Section 5.1, the cutting force would also be decreased to F2 due
to the reduced cut depth. Considering not only l2 < l1 but also F2 < F1 ,
the flexural deflection of the bond structure Δ2 therefore would be
smaller than Δ1 . As understood by the experiments [32], the fibre-matrix
interface failure was dominated by the deformation displacement.
Hence, the debonding happened in the previous cuts would have the
anti-debonding effect on the following cuts, and therefore the
multiple-pass CFRP cutting can be recommended, if the main concerns
place on the machined surface/subsurface quality, rather than the pro­
duction rate.
This paper investigated the damage behaviors of UD-CFRP compos­
ites in orthogonal cutting process based on the proposed FE model. The
key findings of this work might include:
� The 3D FE modelling was proposed and experimentally validated for
both single- and multiple-pass cutting of CFRP. The simulated results
were consistent to the experimental ones, where the maximal rela­
tive errors of 10.1%, 9.2%, and 8% were achieved in terms of fibre
pull-out, debonding depth and cutting force;
� Based on the FE model, the multiple-pass cut of CFRP might be
recommended in comparison with the single-pass strategy, even the
same total cut depths were employed. The multiple pass improved
machined surface/subsurface integrity in terms of fibre breakage

11
H.N. Li et al. Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774

Fig. 10. The enlarged views of the fibre-matrix interface debonding in the example 1 after (a) the first (with the cut depth of 50 μm from the unprocessed surface),
(b) the second (with the cut depth of another 50 μm from the first cut surface), and (c) the single cutting process (with the cut depth of 100 μm from the unprocessed
surface), and in the example 2 after (d) the first, (e) the second, and (f) the single cutting process, (g) the statistical analysis of the fibre-matrix interface debonding
depths, the (h) schematics of the flexural deflection of the bond structure if (h) no debonding happened before the current cut, and (h) the debonding happened in the
previous cuts.

length by 40%, the fibre pull-out depth by 63%, and the fibre-matrix
interface debonding by 25%;
Considering very few studies relating with the multiple-pass cutting
of CFRP was reported, the findings above can be expected to not only
open an avenue to provoke more in-depth thoughts of CFPR behaviors in
cutting but also to provide the practical guidance for industrial CFRP
machining.
Declaration of competing interest
Science Foundation of China (No.51805281), Research Project of State
Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and Vibration (No. MSV201908),
Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (No.
LY20E050014), Ningbo 3315 Innovation Team Scheme (No. 2018A-08-
C), and University of Nottingham Ningbo China (I01180800099,
I01190100001, I01180900005). The authors also would like to express
the special thanks to Dr. Guiqiang Liang and Ms. Yuan Gao from Ling­
hang Kegong Company, and Mr. Xiaoye Cong from University of Not­
tingham Ningbo China for their kind and strong support during this
work.

(1) No actual or potential conflict of interest (including any financial, Appendix A. Supplementary data
personal or other relationships with other people or organizations exists)
in this submission; Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
(2) This paper is the original research that has not been published org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.107774.
previously nor is under consideration for publication elsewhere, in
whole or in part. References

CRediT authorship contribution statement
Hao Nan Li: Writing - original draft, Funding acquisition, Visuali­
zation, Conceptualization. Jun Peng Wang: Formal analysis, Method­
ology. Chao Qun Wu: Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Funding
acquisition. Yong Jie Zhao: Investigation, Data curation. Jie Xu: Soft­
ware, Validation, Formal analysis. Xiaoling Liu: Funding acquisition,
Project administration. Wei Qiang Zhu: Resources.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the supports from National Natural
[1] Che D, Saxena I, Han P, Guo P, Ehmann KF. Machining of carbon fiber reinforced
plastics/polymers: a literature review. J Manuf Sci Eng 2014;136(3):34001.
[2] Wan M, Li S-E, Yuan H, Zhang W-H. Cutting force modelling in machining of fiber-
reinforced polymer matrix composites (PMCs): a review. Compos Appl Sci Manuf
2019;117:34–55.
[3] EI Mansori M, Xu J, Mkaddem A. Recent advances in drilling hybrid FRP/Ti
composite: a state-of-the-art review. Composite Structures 2016;135:316–38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.09.028.
[4] Wang C, Liu G, An Q, Chen M. Occurrence and formation mechanism of surface
cavity defects during orthogonal milling of CFRP laminates. Compos B Eng 2017;
109:10–22.
[5] Xu W, Zhang L. Mechanics of fibre deformation and fracture in vibration-assisted
cutting of unidirectional fibre-reinforced polymer composites. Int J Mach Tool
Manuf 2016;103:40–52.
[6] Koplev A, Lysterup A, Vorm T. The cutting process, chips, and cutting forces in
machining CFRP. Composites 1983;14:371–6.

12
H.N. Li et al.
[7] Arola D, Ramulu M, Wang DH. Chip formation in orthogonal trimming of graphite/
epoxy composite. Compos Appl Sci Manuf 1996;27:121–33.
[8] Bhatnacar N, Ramakrishnan N, Naik NK, Komanduri R. On the machining of Fiber
reinfornced plastic (FRP) composite laminates. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 1995;35:
701–16.
[9] An Q, Chen J, Cai X, Peng T, Chen M. Thermal characteristics of unidirectional
carbon fiber reinforced polymer laminates during orthogonal cutting. J Reinf Plast
Compos 2018;37(13):905–16.
[10] An Q, Cai C, Cai X, Chen M. Experimental investigation on the cutting mechanism
and surface generation in orthogonal cutting of UD-CFRP laminates. Compos Struct
2019;230:111441.
[11] An Q, Ming W, Cai X, Chen M. Study on the cutting mechanics characteristics of
high-strength UD-CFRP laminates based on orthogonal cutting method. Compos
Struct 2015;131:374–83.
[12] Wang XM, Zhang LC. An experimental investigation into the orthogonal cutting of
unidirectional fibre reinforced plastics. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 2003;43(10):
1015–22.
[13] Mei J, Gavalda Diaz O, Axinte DA. An approach on capturing the influence of the
stochasticity of fibre distributions for modelling the variability of cutting forces in
composite materials. Compos B Eng 2017;125:27–38.
[14] Rao GVG, Mahajan P, Bhatnagar N. Three-dimensional macro-mechanical finite
element model for machining of unidirectional-fiber reinforced polymer
composites. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2008;498(1–2):142–9.
[15] Lasri L, Nouari M, El Mansori M. Modelling of chip separation in machining
unidirectional FRP composites by stiffness degradation concept. Compos Sci
Technol 2009;69(5):684–92.
[16] Rao GVG, Mahajan P, Bhatnagar N. Micro-mechanical modeling of machining of
FRP composites - cutting force analysis. Compos Sci Technol 2007;67(3–4):579–93.
[17] Abena A, Soo SL, Essa K. A finite element simulation for orthogonal cutting of UD-
CFRP incorporating a novel fibre-matrix interface model. Procedia CIRP 2015;31:
539–44.
[18] Abena A, Soo SL, Essa K. Modelling the orthogonal cutting of UD-CFRP composites:
development of a novel cohesive zone model. Compos Struct 2017;168:65–83.
[19] Cheng H, Gao J, Kafka OL, Zhang K, Luo B, Liu WK. A micro-scale cutting model for
UD CFRP composites with thermo-mechanical coupling. Compos Sci Technol 2017;
153:18–31.
[20] Cepero-Mejías F, Curiel-Sosa JL, Zhang C, Phadnis VA. Effect of cutter geometry on
machining induced damage in orthogonal cutting of UD polymer composites: FE
study. Compos Struct 2019;214:439–50.
[21] Yan X, Reiner J, Bacca M, Altintas Y, Vaziri R. A study of energy dissipating
mechanisms in orthogonal cutting of UD-CFRP composites. Compos Struct 2019;
220:460–72.
[22] Su Y. Effect of the cutting speed on the cutting mechanism in machining CFRP.
Compos Struct 2019;220:662–76.
[23] Wang J, Feng P, Zheng J, Zhang J. Improving hole exit quality in rotary ultrasonic
machining of ceramic matrix composites using a compound step-taper drill. Ceram
Int 2016;42(12):13387–94.
[24] Jia Z, Fu R, Wang F, Qian B, He C. Temperature effects in end milling carbon fiber
reinforced polymer composites. Polym Compos 2018;39(2):437–47.
[25] Xu W, Zhang L. Tool wear and its effect on the surface integrity in the machining of
fibre-reinforced polymer composites. Compos Struct 2018;188:257–65.
[26] Li H, Qin X, He G, Jin Y, Sun D, Price M. Investigation of chip formation and
fracture toughness in orthogonal cutting of UD-CFRP. Int J Adv Manuf Technol
2016;82(5–8):1079–88.
13
Composites Part B 185 (2020) 107774
[27] Xu J, Li C, Mi S, An Q, Chen M. Study of drilling-induced defects for CFRP
composites using new criteria. Compos Struct 2018;201:1076–87.
[28] Hobbiebrunken T, Fiedler B, Hojo M, Ochiai S, Schulte K. Microscopic yielding of
CF/epoxy composites and the effect on the formation of thermal residual stresses.
Compos Sci Technol 2005;65(10):1626–35.
[29] Johnson GR, Cook WH. A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large
strains, high strain rates and high temperature. In: Proceedings of the 7th
international symposium on ballistics. Conference, Conference; 1983. p. 541–7.
[30] C Campbell F. Structural composite materials. USA: ASM International; 2010.
[31] Canal LP, Segurado J, LLorca J. Failure surface of epoxy-modified fiber-reinforced
composites under transverse tension and out-of-plane shear. Int J Solids Struct
2009;46(11–12):2265–74.
[32] Matveeva AY, Lomov SV, Gorbatikh L. Debonding at the fiber/matrix interface in
carbon nanotube reinforced composites: modelling investigation. Comput Mater
Sci 2019;159:412–9.
[33] Kozey VV, Jiang H, Mehta VR, Kumar S. Compressive behavior of materials: Part II.
High performance fibers. J Mater Res 1995;10(4):1044–61.
[34] Zhou Y, Jiang D, Xia Y. Tensile mechanical behavior of T300 and M40J fiber
bundles at different strain rate. J Mater Sci 2001;36(4):919–22.
[35] Dong B, Tian L, Pan B. Tensile testing of carbon fiber multifilament using an
advanced video extensometer assisted by dual-reflector imaging. Measurement
2019;138:325–31.
[36] Okuda H, Young RJ, Tanaka F, Watanabe J, Okabe T. Tensile failure phenomena in
carbon fibres. Carbon 2016;107:474–81.
[37] Calzada KA, Kapoor SG, DeVor RE, Samuel J, Srivastava AK. Modeling and
interpretation of fiber orientation-based failure mechanisms in machining of
carbon fiber-reinforced polymer composites. J Manuf Process 2012;14(2):141–9.
[38] Abena A, Essa K. 3D micro-mechanical modelling of orthogonal cutting of UD-
CFRP using smoothed particle hydrodynamics and finite element methods. Compos
Struct 2019;218:174–92.
[39] Kaddour AS, Hinton MJ, Smith PA, Li S. Mechanical properties and details of
composite laminates for the test cases used in the third world-wide failure exercise.
J Compos Mater 2013;47(20–21):2427–42.
[40] Naik NK, Shankar PJ, Kavala VR, Ravikumar G, Pothnis JR, Arya H. High strain
rate mechanical behavior of epoxy under compressive loading: experimental and
modeling studies. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2011;528(3):846–54.
[41] Mabrouki T, Girardin F, Asad M, Rigal J-F. Numerical and experimental study of
dry cutting for an aeronautic aluminium alloy (A2024-T351). Int J Mach Tool
Manuf 2008;48(11):1187–97.
[42] Johnson KL. Contact mechanics. UK: Cambridge University Press; 1985.
[43] Voss R, Seeholzer L, Kuster F, Wegener K. Cutting process tribometer experiments
for evaluation of friction coefficient close to a cfrp machining operation. Procedia
CIRP 2017;66:204–9.
[44] Phadnis VA, Makhdum F, Roy A, Silberschmidt VV. Drilling in carbon/epoxy
composites: experimental investigations and finite element implementation.
Compos Appl Sci Manuf 2013;47:41–51.
[45] Gao C, Xiao J, Xu J, Ke Y. Factor analysis of machining parameters of fiber-
reinforced polymer composites based on finite element simulation with
experimental investigation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2016;83(5):1113–25.
[46] Vaughan TJ, McCarthy CT. Micromechanical modelling of the transverse damage
behaviour in fibre reinforced composites. Compos Sci Technol 2011;71(3):388–96.
[47] Camanho PP, Arteiro A. Analysis models for polymer composites across different
length scales. Springer International Publishing; 2017.
[48] Kalla D, Sheikh-Ahmad J, Twomey J. Prediction of cutting forces in helical end
milling fiber reinforced polymers. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 2010;50(10):882–91.