Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 58 (2017) 181 – 186

16th CIRP Conference on Modelling of Machining Operations

Material testing and chip formation simulation for different heat treated
workpieces of 51CrV4 steel
A. Zabela*, T. Röddera, M. Tiffea
a
Institute of Machining Technology, TU Dortmund University, Baroper Straße 303, 44227 Dortmund, Germany
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-231-755-2708; fax: +49-755-5141. E-mail address: zabel@isf.de

Abstract

The heat treatment has a major impact on the mechanical properties of steel alloys and therefore on the condition of a machining processes. In
this paper, the low alloy steel 51CrV4 with different heat treatments is investigated in terms of its mechanical properties under high dynamic
conditions using a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) and by means of orthogonal cutting tests. The latter provide a detailed insight in the
ongoing processes during chip formation by analyzing the present microstructure of the generated chips. Furthermore, the obtained data from the
SHPB tests is used as an input for material models applied for the simulation of chip formation with the Finite-Element-Method. The results
reveal fundamental differences in the chip formation mechanisms between the differently heat treated workpiece materials.
2017The
©©2017 The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier B.V.
B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of The 16th CIRP Conference on Modelling of Machining Operations, in the
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
person of the
Peer-review Conference
under Chairs
responsibility of theProf. J.C.
scientifi Outeiro and
c committee Prof.
of The 16thG. Poulachon.
CIRP Conference on Modelling of Machining Operations

Keywords: Machining; Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB); Chip formation simulation; Finite-Element-Method (FEM)

1. Introduction
Since Finite-Element simulations of chip formation do not
just end in itself but can be used for prediction of component
states like residual stresses and fatigue strength proper input
data is needed. One major prerequisite for such predictions is
the correct calculation of process forces, temperatures and
consequently also the chip’s shapes. The material behaviour, in
terms of flow stress models depending on the plastic
deformation, the deformation rate and the temperature is
crucial for the quality of the simulation results. In cutting these
factors reach very high values and have to be properly
addressed by the parameters of the applied flow stress models.
The Johnson-Cook model is well established for the simulation
of machining operations and is used by many researchers [1-3].
In addition to the original formulation several modifications
were developed, e.g. to include the hardness [4, 5],
recrystallization [6] or a stress state effect on the flow stress
[7]. In order to identify adequate model parameters material
characterization tests have to be carried out, but in contrast to
other manufacturing processes like forming, where
comparatively low strain rates and small temperature gradients
are present such experiments and the measurement are very
difficult. In order to capture the relevant effects at conditions at
least close to those in cutting, the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar
is commonly applied [8, 9].
In this investigation the low alloy steel 51CrV4 with two
different heat treatments is analyzed in a Split Hopkinson
Pressure Bar test. The obtained data is used for fitting of
constitutive flow stress model parameters which are applied in
finite element simulations of chip formation.
2. SHPB design and material testing
For material characterization and the determination of
constitutive material model parameters for cutting simulations
a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar was designed and installed at
the Institute of Machining Technology of TU Dortmund
University. The setup can be seen in Fig. 1. The SHPB has an
overall length of 8 m including the tube, the incident bar and
the transmission bar as well as devices like a compressed air
vessel and a momentum trap to slow down the moving
transmission bar. The air is released by a magnetic valve and
accelerates the projectile in the tube. The projectile, the

2212-8271 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of The 16th CIRP Conference on Modelling of Machining Operations
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.218
182 A. Zabel et al. / Procedia CIRP 58 (2017) 181 – 186
incident bar and the transmission bar are made of AISI H11
steel with a diameter of dbar = 14 mm. The length of the two
bars is lbar = 1.5 m which yields in a length-to-diameter-ratio
of lbar/dbar > 100 ensuring the assumption of a one-dimensional
propagation of elastic waves within the bar. In order to test
materials like high strength steels or nickel- and titanium-based
alloys, ceramik plates are adapted at the interfaces where the
metarial sample is located to prevent plastic deformation of the
two bars. The ceramic plates have a diameter of
dcera = 15.85 mm to match the mechanical impedance J of the
bars which can be calculated as J = ρcA, whereas ρ is the
density, c is the sonic velocity and A is the cross section.
Sleeves made of polyethylene with a high impact strength are
used to hold the ceramic plates in place.
Furthermore, the SHPB is equipped with an induction
heating furnace. A high frequency converter with a power of
P = 2 kW is attached to a double coil inductor which surrounds
the sample and the caremic plates. The heating of the sample is
PID-controlled and the current sample temperature is measured
by an infrared pyrometer in order set certain testing
temperatures. All in all, sample temperatures up to
Tspec = 750°C can be achieved with this setup.
The measurement of the elastic wave in the incident and the
transmission bar is carried out by using strain gauges which are
arranged in a bridge circuit. The signal is captured with a
sample frequency of fS = 1 MHz by the transient recorder
HBM GEN3i.
Fig. 1: SHPB setup with induction heating
For this investigation material samples of low alloy steel
51CrV4 in a ferritic-perlitic state with a hardness of 250 HV
and in a martensitic state with a hardness of 650 HV are used.
The achievable strain-rates are directly influenced by the
dimension of the sample. Therefore, a cylindrical shape of the
size Ø3 mm x 3 mm is chosen. With this configuration
maximum strains of φ ≈ 0.4 can be achieved. In order to
provide good contact conditions and to reduce notch effects,
the samples are ground at their interface surfaces, leading to an
elaborate preparation of the samples and need for an intelligent
design of experiments to reduce the overall effort. Therefore, a
latin hypercube experimental design is setup, including a total
number of experiments of twelve, where the temperature Tspec
and the pressure p are varried in the parameter ranges of
Tspec = [20, 170 - 750]°C and p = [1 - 3.5] bar. The results from
the experiments are later used for the fitting of constitutive
material model parameters based on statistical methods. Due to
the variation of the parameters on multiple levels also non-
linear influences of parameters and their interactions can be
captured by the application of DACE-modeling [10].
Therefore, the adjusted temperature, the measured strain and
the strain-rate are used as input parameters and the measured
flow stress is included as the objective. Eventually, a functional
relationship between the parameters and the flow stress is
obtained.
3. Modelling of flow stress and fitting of constitutive model
parameters
The obtained models describing the flow stress of the
ferritic-pearlitic and the martensitic steel are illustrated in
Fig. 2 for a strain of φ = 0.2 as functions of strain-rate and
temperature. It can be seen, that the achieved strain-rates are
߮ሶ ≈ 8000 1/s for the softer material and ߮ሶ ≈ 6500 1/s for the
harder material. This difference of the latter can be explained
by the higher strength of the material resulting in a higher
resistance against deformation. Both response surfaces reveal a
decrease of the flow stress with rising temperatures due to
thermal activation. The softer material shows a decrease of the
flow stress from σy ≈ 1600 MPa at room temperature to
σy ≈ 900 MPa at T = 600 - 800 °C, where a plateau can be
detected. The decrease of flow stress is even stronger for the
harder material. The flow stress declines from σy ≈ 3100 MPa
at room temperature to σy ≈ 1100 MPa at T = 750°C.
The influence of the strain-rate is rather small, but more
pronounced in case of the softer material. Increasing the strain-
rate leads to higher flow stresses because the faster movements
of dislocations need a higher driving force in terms of stress
fields. Although, the strain-rate does not show a high influence
in the observed interval, the flow stress reveals a big difference
to quasi-static compression tests at a strain-rate of
߮ሶ ≈ 0.0006 1/s where the corresponding flow stresses at room
temperature are σy = 1100 MPa (250 HV) and σy = 2700 MPa
(650 HV).
 A. Zabel et al. / Procedia CIRP 58 (2017) 181 – 186 183

illustrated space in Fig. 2 as well as the extrapolation. It can be

seen, that due to the formulation used, the flow stress decreases
to zero at the chosen melting temperature of Tm = 1500°C.
Furthermore, the gradient of the flow stress is high in the high
temperature regime for the 250 HV steel while the harder
material reveals a high gradient in the low temperature regime.
In both cases the impact of the stain-rate can be considered as
being low.

Table 1. Johnson-Cook flow stress model parameters for 51CrV4 steel

Parameter Material testing 250 HV 650 HV
A Compression test 666 MPa 1914 MPa
B Compression test 662 MPa 2438 MPa
n Compression test 0.269 0.436
C SHPB test 0.0228 0.0102
m SHPB test 1.1468 0.6491
߮Ͳሶ - 0.0006 1/s 0.0006 1/s
Tr - 20°C 20°C
Tm - 1500°C 1500°C

Fig. 2: DACE-models of the flow stress for 51CrV4

The temperature and strain-rate ranges of the measured flow

stresses in the figure shown above are not sufficient to be used
in a Finite-Element based chip formation simulation directly.
An extrapolation beyond the observed ranges is required for
both parameters. This can be obtained by the usage of well
established flow stress models like the Johnson-Cook-model
(JC-model) [11]. In this model the influences of the strain φ,
strain-rate ߮ሶ and temperature T are modeled separately and the
formula reads

§ M · · § § T  Tr ·
m
§ ·
Vy  n

A  B ˜ M ˜ ¨¨1  C ˜ ln ¨¨ ¸¸ ¸¸ ˜ ¨1  ¨¨ ¸¸
© © M0 ¹ ¹ ¨© © Tm  Tr
The first term describes the work hardening due to plastic
deformation. The second and the third term represent the
viscous hardening due to increasing deformation rates and the
thermal softening, respectively. The influence of the strain-rate
is referred to the reference strain-rate ߮଴ሶ while the influence of
the temperature is described in the space between the reference
temperature Tr and the melting temperature of the material Tm.
The parameters A, B, n, C and m are material dependent and
need to be fitted to the measured data. Due to the separately
described influences of strain, strain-rate and temperature it is
sufficient to identify the model parameters in a sequential way.
In this investigation the parameters of the work hardening term
A, B and n are fitted to conventional compression tests at a
strain-rate of ߮଴ሶ = 0.0006 1/s. Afterwards, the parameters C
and m are fitted to the measured flow stresses from the SHPB-
tests. The obtained parameters of the flow stress model are
summarized in Table 1. This process enables the calculation of
flow stresses for higher strain-rates and temperatures as those
used in the SHPB tests. The calculated flow stresses are
illustrated in Fig. 3. This figure further shows the area that is
used for the parameter fitting which corresponds to the
¸ (1)
¹ ¸
¹
Fig. 3: JC-flow stress for 51CrV4 over strain-rate and temperature
4. Simulation of chip formation
The obtained flow stress models are used for two-
dimensional Finite-Element simulations of chip formation
under consideration of a plane strain deformation and thermo-
mechanical coupling. The engagement situation and the
process condition are shown in Fig. 4. With respect to the
machining of hardened steel, a chamfered cutting wedge is
chosen for both materials. The cutting speed and the uncut chip
thickness are set to vc = 180 m/min or h = 0.17 mm,
respectively. The material behavior was considered as elasto-
plastic and the contact condition between the workpiece and
the tool is implemented by applying a Coulomb-friction model
184 A. Zabel et al. / Procedia CIRP 58 (2017) 181 – 186

with µ = 0.1. The cutting wedge is a non-deformable rigid

body.
Simulations are carried out by three different software
packages. The first software is DEFORM-2D V11.1 by SFTC,
which is widely used for chip formation simulation due to a
good accessibility of simulation parameters. Furthermore, it
involves an automatic remeshing routine that is necessary
because of a high distortion of the Finite-Element mesh during
the simulation. Here, bi-linear brick elements with a size of
~6.8 µm in the primary shear zone are used. The second
software is AdvantEdge (AE) V 7.3 by Third Waves Systems,
which is also a special purpose software for the simulation of
machining processes. The modeling of processes is quickly
feasible but the manipulation of simulation parameters is more
limited than in DEFORM. The general purpose FE-software Fig. 5: Fundamental chip formation machine
Abaqus/CAE V 6.14 by Dassault Systems is applied as the
third system, offering implicit and explicit solving procedures For the orthogonal cutting experiments, workpieces from
for Finite-Element problems. The built-in remeshing the same stock material batches as used for the SHPB tests in
capabilities are not sufficient for chip formation simulations, section 2 and 3 are applied. The workpieces provide a length of
therefore different remeshing and data mapping algorithms cut of lc = 24 mm and a width of the undeformed chip of
were implemented. Furthermore, the complete infrastructure bexp = 2.4 mm. A turning insert of the designation
for handling the time steps of a chip formation simulation are TNGA 110308 with a low CBN-content and a ceramic binder
programmed using the Python API of Abaqus. The used is chosen. The cutting edge micro geometry and angles
remeshing procedure is based on a superconvergent node patch correspond to the cutting wedge of the simulation in section 4.
recovery method by Zienkiewicz and Zhu [12, 13]. The The process forces are measured with a dynamometer of the
elements used here are bi-linear bricks with a size of ~20 µm. type 9257B by Kistler.
Due to continuous remeshing in all three simulation systems no
separation criteria for the chip formation is needed. 6. Comparison of experimental and simulation results

The resulting process forces for all simulation systems are

compared to the measured forces in Fig. 6. The measured
process forces for 650 HV are higher than those for 250 HV.
This can be explained by the higher strength and higher
resistance against deformation of the harder material.
Nevertheless, the cutting forces are overestimated in each
simulation. In case of the harder material the deviation is even
higher. When comparing the cutting forces for both materials it
can be noticed that the highest deviations are obtained by
DEFORM while Abaqus provides the lowest differences. The
difference of the simulated normal forces and the measured
ones are smaller in general. Moreover, the normal forces are
underestimated for 250 HV by Abaqus while they are in good
Fig. 4: Process setup for the FE-simulation
agreement for DEFORM. It can be assumed that the flow stress
model might be insufficient due to overestimated cutting forces
5. Experimental investigation of chip formation
and concurrently underrated or matching normal forces. In
correlation to the cutting forces the deviations are higher for the
In order to validate the simulations, orthogonal cutting
harder material. This indicates the calculation of exaggerated
experiments were carried out. Therefore, a fundamental chip
flow stresses by the JC-model used.
formation machine was designed and realized at the Institute of
Machining Technology (Fig. 5). The machine provides three
axes which can be used for cutting and feed motion
simultaneously. The horizontal table in x-direction offers a
maximum stroke of 900 mm. The acceleration of the linear
direct drives with 30 m/s² is high enough to reach a maximum
speed of 180 m/min. A cross table in the y-z-plane can be
moved with a maximum speed of 15 m/min over a length of
200 mm in y-direction and 95 mm in z-direction. Therefore, the
horizontal table realizes the cutting motion and the cross table
positioning of the tool.
 A. Zabel et al. / Procedia CIRP 58 (2017) 181 – 186 185

dislocations in the material during deformation the plasticity

term is replaced by an approach from Hockett and Sherby [15]:

§ M · · § § T  Tr · ·¸
m
§
Vy V HS ˜ ¨¨1  C ˜ ln ¨¨ ¸¸ ¸¸ ˜ ¨1  ¨¨ ¸¸ (2)
© © M0 ¹ ¹ ¨© © Tm  Tr ¹ ¸¹
with

V HS V  V
f f  k f 0 ˜ e dM
e
Fig. 6: Simulated and measured process forces
The simulated chip formation and the experimentally
obtained chip for 650 HV are illustrated in Fig. 7. The
simulations result in a continuous chip formation while the real
chip is distinctly segmented with white layers in the chip root
and on the bottom side. The high material strength of the
hardened steel leads to thermal softening and material
damaging causing a periodic formation of chip segments as it
is investigated by Barry and Byrne [14]. In contrast, the
temperature is the only factor which is responsible for flow
stress softening in the FE-models. The occurring temperatures
are obviously too low to decrease the flow stress significantly,
although temperatures of T ≈ 1000 °C are reached with all three
simulation systems. The temperature distribution is similar for
the different simulation systems. In case of 250 HV continuous
chip formation occurs in the simulations and in the experiment
as well.
Fig. 7: Temperature plots of the simulated chip formation and
microstructure of experimentally obtained chip for 650 HV
Regarding the deviations of the simulated process forces and
the chip shapes a modification of the original JC-flow stress
model was implemented. With respect to the saturation of
 (3)
The parameters are fitted the same way as previously
described (Table 1). Simulations with the modified JC-flow
stress model are carried out with DEFORM only. In addition,
the normalized Cockroft and Latham damage criterion (nCL)
is used in the simulation for 650 HV. The Cockroft and Latham
criterion was used by Umbrello et al. for simulation of hard
machining of AISI H13 tool steel and showed reasonable
results in terms of process forces and chip segmentation [4].
The process forces are illustrated in Fig. 8. For the
continuous chip formation of the 250 HV steel the modification
of the JC-flow stress (JC-mod) reveals a good agreement
between the simulation and the experiment. Both force
components deviate less than 10 % from the measured values.
In case of the harder material the simulation without damage
modelling overestimates the process forces for both
components. Here, the illustrated values represent the mean
process forces. Nevertheless, the deviation is reduced by the
modification of the extended flow stress model. Furthermore a
good agreement is achieved for both force components by
application of the damage model.
Fig. 8: Simulated (DEFORM) mechanical load with modified JC-flow
stress model and additional damage criterion
In Fig. 9 the resulting chip formation is shown. It can be
seen that both chips do not exhibit a homogeneous thickness.
In fact, the chip formation resembles a periodic gliding of
segments. Therefore, the resulting process forces have to be
averaged over a sequence of segments in order to be compared
to the measurement as it is shown in Fig. 8. When comparing
the simulations with and without the nCL it can be noticed that
the usage of the nCL leads to a more distinct segmentation of
the chip. The segment has a longer and thinner shape than the
186 A. Zabel et al. / Procedia CIRP 58 (2017) 181 – 186
chip of the JC-mod simulation. The maximum temperatures are
similar but the gradient of the chip thickness is bigger for the
simulation with nCL. Finally, a good overall agreement of the
simulated and the experimentally obtained chips in shape and
in size can be stated.
Fig. 9: Temperature plots of the simulated chip formation with a modified
flow stress model and the additional nCL-damage criterion
7. Conclusion and Outlook
In this investigation, samples of a low alloy steel with two
different heat treatments were characterized by SHPB tests at
different temperatures. The measured data was used to fit flow
stress model parameters. The parametrized models served as an
input for chip formation simulations with three different Finite-
Element simulation systems. The application of the well-
established Johnson-Cook model revealed an overestimation of
the process forces and deviations of the chip form in
comparison to measured results. A modification of the
plasticity term leads to an improved prediction of the process
forces and an additional damage criterion generates simulated
segmented chips as they can be observed in real cutting tests.
The presented study showed reasonable simulation results
although a simple coulomb friction with µ = 0.1 was used. By
combining the experimentally obtained cutting and normal
force with the assumption of a tool-chip contact exclusively in
the chamfer area (cf. length bf in Fig. 4) friction coefficients of
µ 250HV, exp = 0.039 and µ 650HV, exp = 0.097 can be analytically
estimated. This indicates that the used friction model might be
adequate for the chip formation considered here. Nevertheless,
the frictional conditions also depend on the temperature and the
sliding velocity. In order to consider these influences in future
simulations experimental test should be carried out as proposed
by Puls et al. [16].
References
[1] Umbrello D, M’Saoubi R, Outeiro J. The influence of Johnson-Cook
material constants on finite elemente simulations of machining of
AISI 316L steel. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture
2007; 47:3-4; 462-470
[2] Mabrouki T, Courbon C, Zhang Y, Rech J, Nélias D, Asad M, Hamdi H,
Belhadi S, Salvatore F. Some insights on the modelling of chip formation
and its morphology during metal cutting operations. Comptes Rendus
Mecanique 2016; 344; 335-354
[3] Zanger F. Segmentspanbildung, Werkzeugverschleiß, Randschichtzustand
und Bauteileigenschaften: Numerische Analysen zur Optimierung des
Zerspanungsprozesses am Beispiel von Ti-6Al-4V. Dissertation Karlsruhe;
2013
[4] Umbrello D, Rizzuti S, Outeiro JC, Shivpuri R, M´Saoubi R. Hardness-
based flow stress for numerical simulation of hard machining AISIH13 tool
steel. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2008; 199; 64-73
[5] Umbrello D, Hua J, Shivpuri R. Hardness-based flow stress and fracture
models for numerical simulation of hard machining AISI52100 bearing
steel. Materials Science and Engineering A 2004; 374; 90-100
[6] Karpat Y. Temperature dependent flow softening of titanium alloy
Ti6Al4V: An investigation using finite element simulation of machining.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2011; 211; 737-749
[7] Buchkremer S, Wu B, Lung D, Münstermann S, Klocke, F, Bleck, W. FE-
simulation of machining processes with a new material model. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology 2014; 214; 599-611
[8] Lee WS, Lin CF, Plastic deformation and fracture behaviour of Ti–6Al–4V
alloy loaded with high strain rate under various temperatures. Materials
Science and Engineering 1998; A241; 48-59
[9] Whitenton E. The NIST Kolsky Bar Data Processing System. In:
Proceedings of the 2005 SEM Annual Conference and Exposition,
Portland, OR, USA; 2005
[10] Sacks J, Welch WJ, Mitchell TJ, Wynn HP. Design and Analysis of
Computer Experiments. Statistical Science 1989;4:4, 409-435
[11] Johnson GR, Cook WH. A constitutive model and data for metals
subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. In: Proc.
7th Int. Symp. On Ballistics, Hague, Netherlands, April 1983; 541-547.
[12] Zienkiewicz OC, Zhu JZ. The superconvergent patch recovery and a
posteriori error estimates part 1: the recovery technique. International
Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 1992; 33; 1331-1364
[13] Zienkiewicz OC, Zhu JZ. The superconvergent patch recovery and a
posteriori error estimates part 2: error estimates. International Journal for
Numerical Methods in Engineering 1992; 33; 1365-1382
[14] Barry J, Byrne G. The Mechanisms of Chip Formation in Machining
Hardened Steels. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 2002;
124:3; 528-535
[15] Hockett JH, Sherby OD. Large strain deformation of polychrystalline
metals at low homologous temperatures. Journal of the Mechanics and
Physics of Solids 1975; 23:2, 87-98
[16] Puls H, Klocke F, Lung D. Experimental investigation on friction
undermetal cutting conditions. Wear 2014; 310; 63-71