Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277
DOI 10.1007/s00170-014-6216-6
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Theoretical model for cutting force in rotary ultrasonic
milling of dental zirconia ceramics
Xingzhi Xiao · Kan Zheng · Wenhe Liao
Received: 18 December 2013 / Accepted: 29 July 2014 / Published online: 16 August 2014
© Springer-Verlag London 2014
Abstract Rotary ultrasonic machining or ultrasonic vibra-
tion assisted grinding has superior performance in machin-
ing hard and brittle materials, such as dental zirconia ceram-
ics. However, there are few reports about cutting force
modeling of rotary ultrasonic milling (RUM) for dental
ceramics, especially for cutting force model in feed direc-
tion. In this study, the theoretical model of cutting force both
in axial direction and feed direction is proposed under the
assumption that brittle fracture is the primary mechanism
of material removal in RUM of dental ceramics. The effec-
tive cutting time and material removal volume have been
analyzed to develop the cutting force model. Besides, the
number of active abrasive particles has been calculated for
the first time during the modeling. The effect of overlap-
ping and intersection of fracture zone in peripheral direction
on material removal volume has also been considered via
the parameters K1 and K2 . In addition, the relationships
between the cutting force and input variables are revealed
through the theoretical model. Finally, pilot experiments of
RUM on dental zirconia ceramics are conducted to verify
the theoretical model. The experimental results are consis-
tent well with the model predictions. Therefore, the theo-
retical model can be applied to evaluate the cutting force in
RUM of dental ceramics.
Keywords Rotary ultrasonic milling · Theoretical model ·
Cutting force · Dental zirconia ceramics
X. Xiao · K. Zheng () · W. Liao
School of Mechanical Engineering, Nanjing University of Science
and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China
e-mail: zhengkan@mail.njust.edu.cn
X. Xiao
e-mail: thinksxiao@gmail.com
1 Introduction
Zirconia ceramics have been widely used in dental restora-
tion, for ceramic crowns, bridge, inlays, onlays, and
implants due to their superior biocompatibility, outstand-
ing aesthetics, sufficient mechanical strength, and excellent
wear resistances [1–5]. However, because of their high
hardness and low fracture toughness, full sintered dental zir-
conia ceramics are considered as hard-to-machine materials
for conventional process, especially for dentures complex
shapes [6–9]. Hence, it is important to develop nontra-
ditional machining processes to meet the demand of full
sintered zirconia ceramics machining.
Rotary ultrasonic machining or ultrasonic vibration
assisted grinding is one of these nontraditional machin-
ing methods and has already been employed to machine
many types of materials, especially for hard-to-machine
materials [10–17]. Actually, rotary ultrasonic machining
is a combination of two ordinary material removal pro-
cesses: diamond grinding and ultrasonic machining [18, 19].
Rotary ultrasonic machining contains two different machin-
ing modes: rotary ultrasonic drilling (RUD) and rotary
ultrasonic milling (RUM), as illustrated in Fig. 1a and b,
respectively [14, 20]. The spindle vibrates ultrasonically in
the axial direction. During the machining, if the feed direc-
tion is parallel to the spindle axis it is RUD, while the feed
direction is perpendicular to the spindle axis it is considered
as RUM. The core cutting tool, which is made of metal-
bonded diamond abrasives, rotates and vibrates with the
spindle.
Compared with other machining methods applied in hard
and brittle materials, rotary ultrasonic machining has many
advantages, such as lower cutting force, smaller chipping
size, higher surface quality, and higher material removal
rate [11, 21–26]. Vast of researches on rotary ultrasonic
1264
Fig. 1 Illustration of rotary
ultrasonic machining
process [14, 20]
(a)
machining have been conducted both experimentally and
theoretically, and most investigations focused on the pro-
cess of RUD [27–35]. However, due to the complex shape
of dentures, RUD cannot satisfy the machining requirement
of zirconia ceramics restorations. RUM is the process which
can be utilized to machine the complex shape due to its flex-
ible motion of the core tool. Therefore, it is a crucial need to
investigate the process of RUM in dental zirconia ceramics.
During the RUM, cutting force is an essential index to
reflect the machinability (such as tool wear, cutting tem-
perature, and surface integrity), higher cutting force is apt
to induce edge chipping, surface, and subsurface dam-
age [26, 30, 36]. Additionally, it is also commonly used
as a target of machining process to optimize the input
variables. Therefore, it is significant to predict the cutting
force before machining. However, there are few reports
on predictive model of the cutting force during RUM in
brittle materials. Only Zhang et al [37] presented a math-
ematical cutting force model about the rotary ultrasonic
face milling (RUFM) of brittle materials. The research
about rotary ultrasonic side milling (RUSM) has not
been reported yet.
When the core tool cuts into the workpiece with a large
cutting depth, the abrasive particles on the end face and lat-
eral face would take part in machining. The fracture zone
induced by the end face particles is linked closely to the
axial cutting force, whereas the material removed by lat-
eral face particles is connected to the radial cutting force
(the feed direction cutting force and the cutting force per-
pendicular to both the axial direction and feed direction).
The dental restoration, such as ceramic crown, is a thin-
wall cavity. In order to machine the ceramic crown, large
volume of ceramic materials should be removed. The pro-
cessing efficiency should be improved to meet the clinical
requirement. So the creep-feed and deep grinding assisted
with ultrasonic vibration is applied to improve the material
removal rate. In this case, the abrasive particles on the end
face and lateral face of the tool would take part in cutting,
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277
(b)
and the axial cutting force and feed direction cutting force
would become the important index to evaluate the machin-
ability and processing quality. Consequently, it is essential
to develop the cutting force model for RUM (which contains
both RUFM and RUSM) of dental zirconia ceramics and to
reveal the relationships between cutting parameters and the
cutting force of axial direction and feed direction.
In this paper, a theoretical model is developed to predict
the cutting force both in axial direction and feed direc-
tion during RUM in dental zirconia ceramics, based on the
indentation fracture mechanics under pyramidal indenter.
Effective cutting time and material removal volume of sin-
gle abrasive particle have been analyzed to assist developing
the model. Besides, the relationship between active abra-
sive particles and the length of lateral crack is analyzed,
and then the number of active abrasive particles is calcu-
lated. The effect of input variables on cutting force will be
obtained through the model. Finally, pilot experiments will
be conducted to verify the model.
The paper is organized into five sections. Following this
introduction section, Section 2 describes the dental zirconia
ceramics removal mechanism. The procedure of developing
the theoretical model is shown in Section 3. In Section 4,
pilot experiments will be conducted to verify the prediction
model. Conclusions are drawn up in Section 5.
2 Mechanism of dental zirconia ceramics removal
during RUM
The mechanism of brittle materials removal in RUM is
different from metal removal in grinding. Plastic deforma-
tion was considered as the primary removal mechanism of
metal materials, whereas, for brittle materials, such as zir-
conia ceramics, brittle fracture is the main mechanism [38,
39]. Numerous studies have been done to investigate the
brittle materials removal mechanism in grinding process.
From the existent papers, ceramic materials mainly have
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277 1265

three removal mechanisms, including brittle fracture, plas- constant, which is independent of material-indenter system;
tic flow, and powdering removal. The removal mechanism and C2 = 0.226 [41].
varies with input variables [39, 40], for instance, the tran- RUM is a complex process with numerous abrasive par-
sition of ductile-brittle removal is determined by critical ticles. In order to develop the final cutting force model
cutting depth. in RUM of dental zirconia ceramics, single abrasive parti-
In this paper, only brittle fracture, the dominating cle is analyzed originally. The final model will be derived
removal mechanism in brittle materials machining, is taken by summing up the effects of all active abrasive parti-
into consideration to simplify the theoretical model. This cles. To develop the model, the following assumptions and
simplified method has also been used in many other simplifications are used:
papers [34, 37]. According to the characteristics of grinding
1. The diamond abrasive particles are assumed to be rigid
process for brittle materials, indentation fracture mechan-
octahedrons of the same size, as shown in Fig. 3. Every
ics approach is introduced to investigate the mechanism of
four adjacent triangles have a common vertex, form-
material removal [34, 37, 41].
ing a pyramid. Only one pyramid of each octahedral
The indentation fracture mechanics approach likens
particle takes in cutting, the anther is buried in metal
abrasive-workpiece interactions for grinding of dental zir-
bond.
conia ceramics to small-scale indentation events [39]. The
2. The angle between two opposite edges of an abrasive
cracks and deformation induced by indentation of an abra-
particle is α (α = 90◦ ), and the wear of abrasive parti-
sive particle are illustrated in Fig. 2. Plastic deformation
cles is not taken into account. The edge lengths of the
zone is directly under the abrasive particle. Two principal
single abrasive particle are assumed to be the same b.
crack systems emanating from the plastic zone are medial-
3. Brittle fracture is the primary removal mechanism for
radial cracks and lateral cracks. Medial-radial cracks are
RUM of dental zirconia ceramics.
usually associated with strength degradation, while lateral
4. Only the stable machining process is taken into consid-
cracks are with material removal [39]. Shown from the
eration during the development of cutting force model
direction of spindle axis, the cracks generated by single
in RUM, i.e., the cutting in and out process of the core
abrasive particle are illustrated as Fig. 2. The initiation and
tool are neglected.
propagation of these lateral cracks, at the end, lead to the
removal of the dental zirconia ceramic. The length of the
lateral crack CL and the depth of the lateral crack Ch can be
3 Procedure of modeling cutting force during RUM
obtained by the following equations [41]
 5  3  12 The material volume removed during RUM consists of
1 12 E4 5
CL = C2 · 1
· Fn8 (1) fracture zones generated by abrasive particles on the end
tanα HV KI C (1 − v 2 ) 2 face and abrasive particles on the lateral face. Assuming
 1 1 that these two material removal processes are indepen-
1 3 E2 1
dent, the fracture zone induced by end face particles is
Ch = C2 · · Fn2 (2)
tanα HV linked closely to the axial cutting force, whereas the frac-
Where HV is the hardness of workpiece material, MPa; E ture induced by lateral particles is connected to the radial
is the Youngs modulus of the workpiece material, MPa; v is cutting force tightly. Accordingly, the modeling of axial
the Poissons ratio of the workpiece material; Fn is the load cutting force and radial cutting force should be conducted
applied to the abrasive particle, N; C2 is a dimensionless respectively.

Fig. 2 Cracks system in brittle

material induced by indentation
of an abrasive particle [41]
1266 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277

Fig. 3 Dimension of an
abrasive particle [34]

In the machining process, the motion of tool has an effect Where r is the rotational radius of the abrasive particle,
on the cutting force to some extent [35]. Especially for com- mm; ω is the angular velocity of the abrasive particle, rad/s;
plicated motion, such as RUM, the kinematic characteristic vf is the feed rate, mm/s; t is the processing time, s; fV
directly decides the effective cutting time. Therefore, kine- is the ultrasonic vibration frequency, Hz; and A denotes the
matic analysis is conductive to develop the model of cutting ultrasonic vibration amplitude, μm. Figure 4 displays the
force and should be analyzed before modeling. trajectory of an abrasive particle during RUM.
In this section, kinematic analysis of abrasive particles on The velocity of three directions of abrasive particles can
the core tool will be presented in Section 3.1. Section 3.2 be obtained by differentiating Eq. 3, which is shown as
describes the modeling of axial cutting force step by step. follows
The developing of the feed direction cutting force model ⎧
⎨ vx = −r · ωsin(ωt)
will be shown in Section 3.3. vy = r · ωcos(ωt) + vf (4)
⎩
vz = 2πfV A · cos(2πfV t)
3.1 Kinematic analysis of an abrasive particle on the end
face in RUM According to Eq. 4, the acceleration of abrasive particles
can be derived as:
The kinematic relationships for RUM can be viewed as ⎧
the relative position between the diamond metal-bonded ⎨ ax = −r · ω2 cos(ωt)
ay = −r · ω2 sin(ωt) (5)
core tool and the workpiece. The motion of the individ- ⎩
ual abrasive particle in RUM is a combination of spindle az = −4π 2 fV2 A · sin(2πfV t)
rotation, spindle ultrasonic vibration, and horizontal feed
3.2 Development of axial cutting force model during RUM
motion of the tool, as shown in Fig. 1b. Therefore, the
motion trajectory of abrasive particles during RUM can be
3.2.1 Effective cutting time of single particle on the end
expressed as
face during RUM
⎧
⎨ Sx = r · cos(ωt) When the core tool feeds into the workpiece, besides the
Sy = r · sin(ωt) + vf · t (3) feed motion, abrasive particles on the end face would pene-
⎩
Sz = A · sin(2πfV t) trate ultrasonically into the workpiece at the same time. The

Fig. 4 Trajectory of an abrasive

particle in RUM
Z Axis (mm) Amplitude

e
rat
Feed
in)
/m
X Ax mm
is (m
m) xis (
YA
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277
ultrasonic vibration is illustrated in Fig. 5. As shown in this
figure, the abrasive particles do not take part in cutting con-
tinuously during the entire machining due to the periodic
vibration. Effective cutting time t1e is defined as the time of
taking part in cutting for abrasive particles on end face dur-
ing a vibration cycle. As illustrated in the Fig. 5, it takes an
abrasive particle half of effective cutting time to move from
(A − δ) to A. The effective cutting time can be calculated
using the following equation
 
1 π δ on the end face in a vibration cycle
t1e = − arcsin 1 − (6)
πfV 2 A
Where δ is the maximum penetration depth of an abrasive
particle on the end face, mm.
3.2.2 Relation between the axial impact force
and maximum penetration depth
During RUM process, the penetration depth of single par-
ticle on the end face increases from zero to maximum
and descends to zero thereafter due to ultrasonic vibration.
When the penetration depth of the single particle reaches
the maximum, the axial impact force between the abrasive
particle and the workpiece will ascend to highest level.
According to the outcome of Jiao’s study [42], the rela-
tionship between the axial impact force F1m and the max-
imum penetration depth δ can be described through the
following equation:
1 2 α As can be seen from the Fig. 6, the removal process of
F1m = ξ δ tan HV (7)
2 2
Where F1m is the axial impact force, N; ξ is the geometrical
factor of the indentor (defined as 1.85 in paper [41]); α is
the apex angle of single particle, α = 90◦ ; HV denotes the
hardness of the workpiece, MPa.
According to the Eq. 7, by taking the number of active
abrasive particles into consideration, the axial impact force
between the core tool and workpiece can be expressed as
 V1t =
F1m = N1a · F1m (8)
Where N1a is the number of the active particles on the end
face.
Fig. 5 Schematic illustration of ultrasonic vibration [34]
1267
The actual axial cutting force Fa measured in RUM
experiments has a certain relationship with the axial cutting

force F1m . It can be derived by equaling the impulse in terms

of Fa to the impulse in terms of F1m during each vibration
cycle. It can be described as [18, 31]
 1
F1m t1e = Fa (9)
fV
3.2.3 Material removal volume of an abrasive particle
As abrasive particles rotate and vibrate along with the core
tool during RUM, cracks initiate under the indentation, the
material on workpiece surface will be removed due to the
propagation and intersection of cracks.
The shape of cracks induced by single abrasive parti-
cle has been discussed, as shown in Fig. 2. The fracture
zone induced by an abrasive particle on the end face dur-
ing an ultrasonic vibration cycle is illustrated in Fig. 6. l1e is
the effective cutting distance that an abrasive particle trav-
els during effective cutting time t1e . It can be calculated
approximately by following equation:
2πnr
l1e = t1e (10)
60
Where n is the spindle speed, rpm; r is the radius of the
active abrasive particle, mm.
material can be simplified as, a rectangle, whose length and
width vary with the penetration depth, sweeping along with
the trajectory of an abrasive particle on the end face in an
ultrasonic vibration cycle. So the volume of fracture zone
produced in an ultrasonic vibration cycle V1t can be con-
sidered as the octahedron illustrated in Fig. 6 and can be
calculated approximately through the following equation
2
CL CH l1e (11)
3
When the number of active abrasive particles on the end
face is taken into account, the material removal volume of
Fig. 6 Volume removed by an end face abrasive particle during RUM
1268 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277

(a) (b)
Fig. 7 Relationship between material removal volume and input variables during RUM

active abrasive particles on the end face in an ultrasonic

vibration cycle V1t can be obtained as
 2
V1t = N1a · V1t = N1a CL CH l1e (12)
3
During RUM process, due to the feed motion of dia-
mond metal-bonded core tool, the material is removed not
only by abrasive particles on the end face but also by abra-
sive particles on lateral face. The proportion of these two
part removed volumes depends on cutting depth ap of core
tool. As shown in Fig. 7, the exposed height he of end face
abrasive particles and their ultrasonic vibration amplitude
A result in material removal directly under the tool. When
ap < he , the material is removed only by abrasive par-
ticles on the end face, i.e., in this case, the feed direction
cutting force can be ignored. When ap ≥ he , the abrasive
particles on the lateral face will take part in cutting, and the
feed direction cutting force should be analyzed. So the fol-
lowing modeling of the feed direction cutting force is in the
circumstance ap ≥ he .
The material removed by end face active abrasive parti-
cles in an ultrasonic vibration cycle can also be expressed as
(A + ap ) · Do · vf · f1V ap < he
V1a = (13)
(A + he ) · Do · vf · f1V ap ≥ he
of removed volume in radial direction will be counteracted
by calculating the number of active abrasive particles, and it
will be discussed specifically in Section 3.2.4.
As for the overlapping and intersection of removed vol-
ume in peripheral direction, the degree of overlapping and
intersection between different abrasive particles are deter-
mined by the cutting parameters (spindle speed, feed rate,
and cutting depth). In this subsection, a parameter K1
a a
(K1 =c11 · na11 · vf12 · ap13 ) will be introduced to solve the

problem, so the relationship between V1t and V1a can be
obtained as follows

V1t = K1 · V1a (14)
3.2.4 The number of active abrasive particles
during effective cutting time
During the RUM, based on the method of calculating mate-
rial removal volume, which has been discussed above, not
all of the abrasive particles on the end face can be consid-
ered as active particles, i.e., the number of active particles
N1a is not the number of entire particles on the end face.
According to the Fig. 8, the abrasive particles in these
two cracks system (ABCDF GH E and F GH EKLI J ) are

Where Do is the outer diameter of diamond metal-bonded

core tool, mm; vf is the feed rate of the core tool, mm/s.
For abrasive particles on the end face, the material
removal volume cannot be calculated simply multiplying
the number of entire abrasive particles on the end face by
the material volume removed of an abrasive particle due
to the overlapping and intersection of the material removed

volume generated by different particles, i.e., V1t = V1a .
The overlapping and intersection mainly exist in two dif-
ferent directions, peripheral direction, and radial direction,
respectively. In this study, the overlapping and intersection Fig. 8 Interaction of two adjacent crack system
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277 1269

not active particles. The fracture zone moved by the two Table 1 Compositions of dental zirconia ceramic material
cracks system has already included the zone removed by the
Composition ZrO2 Y2 O3 Al2 O3 SiO2 F e2 O3 Na2 O
particles between the groove mn and po. Based on this, the
overlapping and intersection of different cracks should be Content (%) < 96 5.30 0.25 ≤ 0.002 ≤ 0.002 ≤ 0.002
taken into consideration. In order to simplify the calculation,
assume that active abrasive particles distribute as shown in
Fig. 9. The distribution of the abrasive particles in periph- 720K1 (A + ap ) · Do · vf · A · b
δ2 = 2
·
1
eral direction is in accordance with the practical condition, ( 12 ξ ) · C0 Ca3 C2 · πn(Ro + Ri )2 (Ro − Ri )
2
while the distribution of abrasive particles in radial direc- 1
tion is determined by the length of lateral crack. Hence, the HV2
(17)
number of active abrasive particles on the end face can be 1
(tan α2 ) 6 · E 2
1

expressed as:
Substituting Eqs. 1, 7, 15, 16, and 17 into Eq. 9, the
 2
0.88 × 10−3 Ca 3
Ro − Ri Ro + Ri relation between cutting force and input variables in the
N1a = √ · · ·b condition of ap < he can be derived as the following
2 3 100 2CL 2
3 b ρ equation:
2
Ca3   18
= C0 · Ro2 − Ri2 (15) 7 1 1 − 15 − 18 Ro2 − Ri2
4CL b Fa = K1 · K0 · C0 · Ca
8 8 12
· C2 8 7
·b
· ·
(Ro + Ri ) 8
Where Ca is the abrasive concentration [31]; b is the abra-  7 7 21 1  1
sive size, mm; Ro is the core tool outer radius, mm; Ri is the Do · Vf 8 (A + ap ) 8 HV16 · KI2C · 1 − v 2 4
· 1
·  3
core tool inner radius, mm; ρ is the density of abrasive mate- n A8
13
E 16 · tan α2 16
rial, g/mm3 , ρ = 3.25 × 10−3 g/mm3 ; C0 is a dimensionless
2 (18)
constant, Co = [3 × 0.88 × 10−3/(100 × 20.5 ρ)] 3 = 0.033.
33 7
Where K0 is a dimensionless constant, K0 = 2− 16 ×360 8 ×
1 7
3.2.5 Axial cutting force model ξ 16 × π − 8 = 14.60. When ap ≥ he , the axial cutting force
can be obtained by replacing ap with he in the Eq. 18.
In order to simplify calculation, Eq. 6 can be simply
expressed as [18, 37] 3.3 Modeling of cutting force in feed direction during
RUM (ap ≥ he )
δ
t1e = (16)
2AfV In terms of the abrasive particle on the lateral face, the
Substituting Eqs. 1, 2, 7, 10, 12, 13, 15 and 16 into Eq. 14, width of workpiece is larger than the diameter of core tool.
the maximum penetration depth in the condition of ap < he Besides, the cutting depth ap is equal or larger than the
can be obtained as: exposed height he of the abrasive particles on the end face,
i.e., ap ≥ he . As explained in Section 3.2.3, when ap < he ,
the abrasive particles on the lateral face of the core tool do
not take part in cutting during RUM. So when it comes to the

Fig. 9 Distribution of end face abrasive particles of core tool Fig. 10 Schematic illustration of RUM
1270 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277

Table 2 Properties of dental zirconia ceramic material (the uncharted When the core tool takes part in cutting during RUM, due
value is the sintered zirconia ceramics) to the feed motion, part of materials is removed by abrasive
Property Unit Value particles on the lateral face. Although ultrasonic vibration
also has influence on lateral particles, the mechanism of
Bending strength MPa 800-1000 material removal is same to conventional diamond grinding
Fracture strength MPa 1200 of brittle materials. Because the feed rate is much lower than
Fracture toughness MPa·m1/2 6 the rotation speed of lateral particles, the effect of feed rate
Vickers hardness GPa 12 (sintered) on penetration depth of the lateral particles can be ignored
0.7 (pre-sintering) during a rotation cycle. More specifically, the penetration
Elastic modulus Gpa 210 depth of lateral particles is constant, only the trajectory of
Density g/cm3 6.05 (sintered) particles turns into a fluctuant circular arc. Consequently,
3.10 (pre-sintering) the machining process of the lateral face of diamond core
tool can be simplified as conventional diamond grinding.
In stable cutting condition, i.e., except the process of cut-
modeling of the feed direction cutting force, only the con- ting in and out, the contact area between the lateral face of
dition ap ≥ he is taken into consideration. The schematic core tool and workpiece is constant. More exactly, the num-
illustration of RUM is shown in Fig. 10. Therefore, the ber of active abrasive particles taking in cutting is constant.
effective cutting time in a rotation cycle is half of the cycle, Adopting the similar analysis method that used to calculate
i.e. the active particles number on the tool end face, the num-
1 60 30 ber of active abrasive particles on the lateral face N2a can
t2e = · = (19) be expressed as
2 n n
Where n is the spindle speed, rpm.
0.88 × 10−3 Ca 2 ap − he √ πDo
N2a = [ √ · ]3 · · 2b · (20)
2 3 100 2CL 2
3 b ρ

Fig. 11 Force analysis of lateral abrasive particles during RUM Fig. 12 Volume removed by a lateral abrasive particle during RUM

Table 3 The values of input variables for obtaining K1

Experiment Spindle speed (rpm) Feed rate (mm/min) Cutting depth (μm)

1st group 1500 3000 4500 6000 40 15

2nd group 4500 20 30 40 50 15
3rd group 4500 40 5 10 15 20

Table 4 The values of input variables for obtaining K2

Experiment Spindle speed (rpm) Feed rate (mm/min) Cutting depth (μm)

1st group 1500 3000 4500 6000 10 130

2nd group 3000 5 10 15 25 130
3rd group 3000 10 100 130 160 190
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277 1271

Where ap is the depth of cutting, mm; he is the exposed

height of single abrasive particle on the end face, mm.
Base on the above simplifications, the vibration of lat-
eral particles does not have influence on cutting force in
feed direction. So only rotation motion and feed motion are
taken into account when analyze the cutting force of feed
direction. The force distribution of the lateral particles at a
given time during cutting process is illustrated in Fig. 11.
The radial cutting force of each particle Fr is equal, and it
is also symmetrical about Y axis. The relationship between
the cutting force in feed direction and the cutting force of
single particle can be expressed by following equation

Ff = Fr sinθ · dN2a

0.88 × 10−3
π
2 Ca 2 ap − he
=2 Fr sinθ · [ √ · ]3 · ·
2 3 100 2CL
3 b ρ
0
√
2b · Ro dθ (21)
Calculated as
088 × 10−3 Ca 2 ap − he √ Do
Ff = 2Fr [ √ · ]3 · · 2b · (22)
2 3 100 2CL 2
3 b ρ
According to the Fig. 12, the material volume removed
by an abrasive particle in a rotation cycle V2r can be
calculated approximately as
V2r = 2CL CH · πRo (23)
When the number of active abrasive particles on the lat-
eral face is taken into account, the material removal volume
of lateral face active abrasive particles in a rotation cycle

V2r can be obtained as

V2r = 2N2a CL CH · πRo (24)
In addition, the material removal volume in a rotation
cycle can also be obtained by the equation
60
V2a = πRo (ap − he ) · · vf (25)
n
Due to the overlapping and intersection of different abra-
sive particles in peripheral direction, the theoretical removal

volume of the active abrasive particles V2r will not be equal
to the actual removal volume V2a . The degree of over-
lapping and interference of different abrasive particles is
determined by the cutting parameters (spindle speed, feed
rate, and cutting depth). Therefore, there exist some differ-

ences between V2r and V2a . In this study, a parameter K2
a
(K2 =c21 · n 21 · vfa22 · ap23 ) will be introduced to solve the
a

problem, so the relationship between V2r and V2a can be
Fig. 13 Relationship between the value of parameter K1 and input
obtained as follows: variables

V2r = K2 · V2a (26) 1
as 30K2 · vf · b · (tan α2 ) 3 · HV 2
Substituting Eqs. 1, 2, 20, 24 and 25 into Eq. 26, the cut- Fr = [ 2
] (27)
1
ting force in feed direction of each particle Fr can be derived n · C02 · Ca · πDo · C2 · E
3 2
1272 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277

Substituting Eqs. 1, and 27 into Eq. 22, the relationship

between cutting force and input variables can be obtained
by the following equation

3 1 1 1 3
K24 · K3 · C02
4
· Ca6 (ap − he ) · Do4 · vf4
Ff = 7
· 1 3
·
C24 b4 · n4
2 5 1 1
(tan α2 ) 3 · HV4 · KI2C · (1 − v 2 ) 4
3
(28)
E4
3
Where K3 = 2 × 15 4 /π = 4.85; C02 = (3 × 0.88 ×
2
10−3 /(100 × 20.5 ρ)) 3 = 0.033.

4 Experiments verification

4.1 Experimental setup

Rotary ultrasonic milling experiments are conducted on an

ultrasonic vibration machine (DMG Ultrasonic 20 linear,
DMG, Germany). The experiment setup mainly consists of
an ultrasonic spindle system, a numerical control machin-
ing system, a cutting force data acquisition system, and a
coolant system.
The maximum spindle speed with ultrasonic vibration
is 10,000 rpm, while the maximum spindle speed without
ultrasonic vibration is 42,000 rpm. The vibration frequency
varies from 20 to 50 KHz as the change of tool-workpiece
system. The vibration amplitude is about 5 μm. The tool
used in the experiments is also provided by DMG, it is a dia-
mond metal-bonded core tool, the outer diameter of the tool
is 8 mm with wall thickness of 0.6 mm, and the diamond
particle size (mesh) of D126. Cutting fluid is used during
RUM as external coolant and internal coolant. The cutting
force data is acquired by Kistler 9257 dynamometer, and
then handled by the Dynoware software. After that, the aver-
age value of the cutting force, which is the mean value of the
whole cutting force in stable condition, will be obtained.

4.2 Design of experiments

As analyzed in Section 3.3, in order to obtain the param-

eter K2 , the cutting depth ap of the experiments should
be larger than the exposed height of the abrasive particles
he . Therefore, two states of the dental zirconia ceramics
(the sintered ceramics and pre-sintering ceramics) will be
used to conduct the experiments. The ceramics are provided
by Qinhuangdao aidite high-technical ceramics, CO., Ltd.
Fig. 14 Relationship between the value of parameter K2 and input
The compositions and the primary mechanical properties of variables (k = 2/3 E 2 1/3 )
kI C ·(1−v )
the dental zirconia ceramics are shown in Tables 1 and 2,
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277 1273

Fig. 15 Predicted relationship between the axial cutting force and input variables
1274 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277

Table 5 The values of input variables for verification of the axial

cutting force model

Input variable Value

Spindle speed (rpm) 1000, 2500, 4000, 5500

Feed rate (mm/min) 15, 25, 35, 45
Cutting depth (μm) 5, 10, 15, 20

respectively. The dimension of the dental zirconia ceramics

are 30×15×5 mm and 20×15×14 mm, respectively.
The design of the experiments is given in Tables 3 and
4, respectively. Spindle speed has four levels, as well as
feed rate and cutting depth. Other variables, cutting width,
ultrasonic vibration frequency which depends on the reso-
nance frequency of tool-workpiece system, and ultrasonic
vibration amplitude, are constant. They are taken as 8 mm,
12.9 KHz and 5 μm respectively.

4.3 Obtaining K1 , K2 , and model predictions

According to the Eq. 18, if the cutting force can be measured

through experiments, then the value of K1 can be obtained.
After that the parameters (c11 , a11, a12 , and a13 ) can be
deduced through the least square estimation (LSE) method.
Finally, the complete theoretical model of axial cutting force
can be obtained. Figure 13 shows the relationship between
the value of parameter K1 and input variables. As shown in
the figure, the K1 varies with the cutting parameters, and
it is consistent with the analysis discussed in Section 3.2.3.
The specific formal of K1 can be deduced to reveal the
relationship between the K1 and cutting parameters by the
LSE method. It is expressed as K1 =0.0614n0.5738 · vf−0.8564 ·
ap−0.5313 . The K2 can be obtained in a similar method, and it
can be shown as K2 =1.1115 × 10−6 · 2/3 E 2 1/3 · n0.8365 ·
kI C ·(1−v )
−0.9219 −2.1235
vf ·ap . Figure 14 shows the relationship between
K2 and input variables. It agrees well with the analysis in
Section 3.3.
Figure 15 shows the predicted relationship between the
theoretical axial cutting force and input variables while
Fig. 16 illustrates the predicted relationship between the
theoretical feed direction cutting force and input variables.
The axial cutting force shows an upward trend as the feed
rate and the cutting depth increase while it descends with

Table 6 The values of input variables for verification of the feed

direction cutting force model

Input variable Value

Spindle speed (rpm) 1000, 2500, 4000, 5500

Feed rate (mm/min) 10, 15, 20, 25
Fig. 16 Predicted relationship between the feed direction cutting force
and input variables Cutting depth (μm) 120, 150, 180, 210
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277 1275

Fig. 17 Comparison of the axial cutting force between theoretical

values and experimental values Fig. 18 Comparison of the feed direction cutting force between
theoretical values and experimental values
1276
the rise of spindle speed. The axial cutting force is non-
linear proportional to ultrasonic vibration amplitude, and
the ultrasonic frequency has no influence on axial cutting
force through the theoretical model. It is consistent with
the Zhangs research [37]. When it comes to the feed direc-
tion cutting force, the spindle speed and feed rate show
the similar effect on the theoretical feed direction cutting
force. The feed direction cutting force increases with the
rise of the cutting depth initially, but then it experiences a
slight downward trend. Besides, the vibration amplitude has
no influence on the feed direction cutting force. Compared
with machining variables, the properties of the tool have lit-
tle effect on both the axial cutting force and feed direction
cutting force.
4.4 Comparison of predictive values and experimental
values
The verification experiments are designed as the same of the
experiments for obtaining K1 and K2 , the specifical values
of the input variables for the verification of the axial cutting
force model and feed direction cutting force model are listed
in Tables 5 and 6, respectively. The experimental values
and theoretical values of the cutting forces (the axial cutting
force and the feed direction cutting force) are compared in
Figs. 17 and 18, respectively. It can be seen that the trends
of theoretical models agree well with the trends obtained
experimentally.
5 Conclusions
A theoretical cutting force model for rotary ultrasonic
milling in both axial direction and feed direction has been
developed. The relationship between input variables and
cutting force has been analyzed both theoretically and
experimentally. The following conclusions can be summa-
rized from the study:
1. During the modeling, the overlapping and intersection
between different abrasive particles have been taken
into account via calculating the number of active abra-
sive particles and the parameters K1 and K2 . The
number of active abrasive particles is inversely propor-
tional to the length of the lateral crack, and the K1 and
K2 increase with the rise of spindle speed while decline
with the increase of feed rate and cutting width.
2. From the developed model, the cutting force in both
axial and feed direction will decrease with the rise of
spindle speed and abrasive size, whereas increase as the
feed rate and abrasive concentration increase. As the
cutting depth increase, the axial cutting force increases
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277
steadily while the feed direction cutting force ascends
originally and then decreases slightly.
3. The trends of input variables on the cutting force ana-
lyzed through theoretical model are consistent well with
the trends obtained from experiments. Therefore, the
theoretical cutting force model can be used to pre-
dict the cutting force during RUM of dental zirconia
ceramics.
In this paper, it is innovative to propose a cutting force
model for RUM of dental zirconia ceramics in predicting
cutting force both in axial direction and feed direction. The
model can serve as a reference for efficient manufacturing
of dental zirconia ceramics during RUM.
Acknowledgments This research was financially supported by the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.51305206)
and the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (Grant
No.BK2012402).
References
1. Piconi C, Maccauro G (1999) Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial.
Biomaterials 20(1):1–25
2. Raigrodski AJ (2004) Contemporary materials and technologies
for all-ceramic fixed partial dentures: a review of the literature. J
Prosthet Dent 92(6):557–562
3. Gamborena I, Blatz MB (2006) A clinical guidelines to predictable
esthetics with zirconium oxide ceramic restorations. Dent Technol
29:11–23
4. Manicone PF, Iommetti PR, Raffaelli L (2007) An overview of zir-
conia ceramics: Basic properties and clinical applications. J Dent
35(11):819–826
5. Kosovka OD, Vesna M, Slobodan D, Dragan G (2013) Dilemmas
in zirconia bonding: a review. Srp Arh Celok Lek 141(5–6):395–
401
6. Blue DS, Griggs JA, Woody RD, Miller BH (2003) Effects of bur
abrasive particle size and abutment composition on preparation of
ceramic implant abutments. J Prosthet Dent 90(3):247–254
7. Guazzato M, Albakry M, Quach L, Swain MV (2005) Influence
of surface and heat treatments on the flexural strength of a glass-
infiltrated alumina/zirconia-reinforced dental ceramic. Dent Mater
21(5):454–463
8. Curtis AR, Wright AJ, Fleming GJP (2006) The influence of
surface modification techniques on the performance of a Y-TZP
dental ceramic. J Dent 34(3):195–206
9. Denry I, Kelly JR (2008) State of the art of zirconia for dental
applications. Dent Mater 24(3):299–307
10. Pei ZJ, Ferreira PM (1999) An experimental investigation of rotary
ultrasonic face milling. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 39(8):1327–1344
11. Li ZC, Jiao Y, Deines TW, Pei ZJ, Treadwell C (2005) Rotary
ultrasonic machining of ceramic matrix composites: Feasibility
study and designed experiments. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 45(12–
13):1402–1411
12. Churi NJ, Pei ZJ, Treadwell C (2006) Rotary ultrasonic machin-
ing of titanium alloy: Effects of machining variables. Mach Sci
Technol 10(3):301–321
13. Churi NJ, Pei ZJ, Shorter DC, Treadwell C (2009) Rotary ultra-
sonic machining of dental ceramics. Int J Mach Mach Mater
6(3–4):270–284
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 75:1263–1277
14. Zhang CL, Feng PF, Zhang Jf, Wu ZJ, Yu DW (2012) Investigation
into the rotary ultrasonic face milling of K9 glass with mechanism
study of material removal. Int J Manuf Technol Manag 25(4):248–
266
15. Lauwers B, Bleicher F, Ten H, Vanparys M, Bernreiter J, Jacobs T,
Loenders J (2010) Investigation of the process-material interaction
in ultrasonic assisted grinding of ZrO2 based ceramic materials.
In: 4th CIRP international conference high perform cut, vol 2, pp
59–64
16. Bhaduri D, Soo SL, Novovic D, Aspinwall DK, Harden P,
Waterhouse C, Bohr S, Mathieson AC, Lucas M (2013) Ultrasonic
assisted creep feed grinding of Inconel 718. In: 17th CIRP conf
electro phys chem mach (ISEM), vol 6, pp 615–620
17. Cong WL, Pei ZJ, Deines TW, Liu DF, Treadwell C (2013) Rotary
ultrasonic machining of CFRP/Ti stacks using variable feedrate.
Compos: Part B Eng 52:303–310
18. Pei ZJ, Prabhakar D, Ferreira PM, Haselkorn M (1995) A mecha-
nistic approach to the prediction of material removal rates in rotary
ultrasonic machining. J Eng Ind 117:142–151
19. Pei ZJ, Ferreira PM, Kapoor SG, Haselkorn M (1995) Rotary
ultrasonic machining for face milling of ceramics. Int J Mach
Tools Manuf 35(7):1033–1046
20. Lv DX, Huang Y, Tang YJ, Wang HX (2013) Relationship
between subsurface damage and surface roughness of glass BK7
in rotary ultrasonic machining and conventional grinding pro-
cesses. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 67(1–4):613–622
21. Vicario I, Gonzalo O, Bengoetxea I (2007) Rotary ultrasonic
machining of aluminum oxide ceramics: Designed experiments.
Int J Mach Mach Mater 2(2):233–243
22. Lauwers B (2011) Surface integrity in hybrid machining pro-
cesses. Procedia Eng 19:241–251
23. Brecher C, Wenzel C, Schug R, Weber A, Hannig S (2010) New
systematic and time saving procedure to design cup grinding
wheels for the application of ultrasonic assisted grinding. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 47(1–4):153–159
24. Lv DX, Huang YH, Wang HX, Tang YJ, Wu XC (2013) Improve-
ment effects of vibration on cutting force in rotary ultrasonic
machining of BK7 glass. J Mater Process Technol 213(9):1548–
1557
25. Suzuki K, Uematsu T, Iwai M, Ninomiya S, Sano S, Nakagawa
T (2007) A new complex grinding method for ceramic mate-
rials combined with ultrasonic vibration and electro discharge
machining. Key Eng Mater 329:439–444
26. Li ZC, Cai LW, Pei ZJ, Treadwell C (2006) Edge-chipping reduc-
tion in rotary ultrasonic machining of ceramics: Finite element
analysis and experimental verification. Int J Mach Tools Manuf
46(12–13):1469–1477
27. Pei ZJ, Ferreira PM (1998) Modeling of ductile-mode material
removal in rotary ultrasonic machining. Int J Mach Tools Manuf
38(10–11):1399–1418
1277
28. Lv DX, Wang HX, Tang YJ, Huang YH, Li ZP (2013) Influences
of vibration on surface formation in rotary ultrasonic machining
of glass BK7. Precis Eng 37(4):839–848
29. Hu P, Zhang JM, Pei ZJ, Treadwell C (2002) Model-
ing of material removal rate in rotary ultrasonic machining:
Designed experiments. J Mater Process Technol 129(1–3):339–
344
30. Zeng WM, Li ZC, Pei ZJ, Treadwell C (2005) Experimental obser-
vation of tool wear in rotary ultrasonic machining of advanced
ceramics. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(12–13):1468–1473
31. Qin N, Pei ZJ, Treadwell C, Guo DM (2009) Physics-based
predictive cutting force model in ultrasonic vibration-assisted
grinding for titanium drilling. J Manuf Sci Eng ASME 131:111–
119
32. Wu JQ, Cong WL, Williams RE, Pei ZJ (2011) Dynamic process
modeling for rotary ultrasonic machining of alumina. J Manuf Sci
Eng ASME 133:041012-1-5
33. Zhao CY, Gong H, Fang FZ, Li ZJ (2013) Experimental study on
the cutting force difference between rotary ultrasonic machining
and conventional diamond grinding of K9 glass. Mach Sci Technol
17(1):129–144
34. Liu DF, Cong WL, Pei ZJ, Tang YJ (2012) A cutting force model
for rotary ultrasonic machining of brittle materials. Int J Mach
Tools Manuf 52(1):77–84
35. Bertsche E, Ehmann K, Malukhin K (2013) An analytical model
of rotary ultrasonic milling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 65(9–
12):1705–1720
36. Ahmed Y, Cong WL, Stanco MR, Xu ZG, Pei ZJ, Treadwell
C, Zhu YL, Li ZC (2012) Rotary ultrasonic machining of alu-
mina dental ceramics: a preliminary experimental study on surface
and subsurface damages. J Manuf Sci Eng ASME 133:064501-
1-5
37. Zhang CL, Zhang JF, Feng PF (2013) Mathematical model for
cutting force in rotary ultrasonic face milling of brittle materials.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol 69(1–4):161–170
38. Pei ZJ, Ferreira PM, Haselkorn M (1995) Plastic flow in rotary
ultrasonic machining of ceramics. J Mater Process Technol 48(1–
4):771–777
39. Malkin S, Hwang TW (1996) Grinding mechanisms for ceramics.
Ann of CIRP-Manuf Technol 45(2):569–580
40. Larchuk TJ, Conway JC, Kirchner HP (1985) Crushing as a
mechanism of material removal during abrasive machining. J Am
Ceram Soc 68(4):209–215
41. Marshall DB, Lawn BR, Evans AG (1982) Elastic/plastic inden-
tation damage in ceramics: the lateral crack system. J Am Ceram
Soc 65(11):561–566
42. Jiao F (2008) The Theoretical and experimental studies on
ultrasonic aided high efficiency lapping with solid abra-
sive of engineering ceramic. Dissertation, Shanghai Jiao Tong
University