Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Wear
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wear

Model for tool wear prediction in face hobbing plunging of bevel gears
M. Kamratowski a, *, C. Alexopoulos a, J. Brimmers a, T. Bergs a, b
a
WZL of RWTH Aachen University, Campus-Boulevard 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
b
Fraunhofer IPT, Steinbachstraße 17, 52074, Aachen, Germany

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

Keywords: This paper deals with tool wear investigations for face hobbing plunging of bevel gears. Initially, the influence of
Face hobbing process parameters and tool geometry on tool wear is analyzed both in cutting trials and with the help of the
Tool wear model manufacturing simulation BEVELCUT. Subsequently, a tool wear model is presented. Input parameters into the
Bevel gears
model are tool and workpiece data as well as process parameters and chip characteristics. Through the
Manufacturing simulation
manufacturing simulation BevelCut, which is based on a planar penetration algorithm, chip characteristics such
as the maximum chip thickness hcu,max are calculated resolved in time and location along the blade’s cutting
edge. Combined with the local cutting speed, the chip characteristics are used to determine the thrust force,
which is required to calculate the elastic workpiece deformation. The model coefficients are calibrated by multi-
variable regression analysis using the results of the cutting trials and simulation results. The quality of the
regression is determined with the help of equivalence tests. For verification, the process parameters and tool
geometry are varied in series production and the tool wear is assessed. Finally, the modeled tool wear is
compared to the measured tool wear.

1. State of the art
Soft cutting of hypoid bevel gears with multi-part tool systems con­
sisting of a cutterhead and carbide stick blades is common throughout
the manufacturing industry. Soft cutting processes can, on one hand, be
distinguished by the applied indexing method and thus, by their flank
generation, in continuous indexing (face hobbing) and discontinuous
indexing (face milling). On the other hand, soft cutting processes can be
classified according to their type of profile generation into plunging and
generating. For manufacturing, face milling or face hobbing is combined
with either plunging or generating. [1–3]
Experimental as well as simulative investigations on tool wear in
bevel gear cutting have been conducted primarily for face milling
plunging so far. KLEIN varied the process and tool design for single blade
group trials. In all cutting trials, 16MnCr5 was used as workpiece ma­
terial. In all cases, tool life was determined by a local maximum of
abrasive wear at the blade’s tip or corner of the main cutting edge.
Additionally, KLEIN benchmarked cutting materials and coatings of stick
blades with respect to the tool wear behavior at varying cutting speeds
and feeds. The highest tool life was achieved using fine grain carbides,
while on the blades made of ultra-fine grain carbide and PM-HSS
significantly higher wear in the form of breakouts along the main
cutting edge occurred. Furthermore, images taken with a scanning
electron microscope (SEM) of used fine grain carbide tools with different
hardness showed an increased adherence of workpiece material to the
main cutting edge. For coating materials KLEIN compared the wear
behavior of TiAlN monolayer, TiAlN multilayer and AlCrN monolayer
on fine grain carbide blades. The highest tool life was achieved with
TiAlN multilayer coating. [4]
HERZHOFF and HARDJOSUWITO developed tool life models to predict the
tool wear for face milling plunging of bevel gears. Both tool life models
are based on empirical models for single flank chips, which were
extended by a multi-flank chip factor to consider the cross-section of
bevel gears [5,6]. In HERZHOFF’S model, the individual factors depend on
stress and temperature, which were derived by a three-dimensional
finite element model of the plunging process [6]. HARDJOSUWITO’S
model was composed by a regression analysis of geometrical input data,
which was derived through a three-dimensional penetration calculation
[5,7]. The model parameters for both HERZHOFF’S and HARDJOSUWITO’S
models were calibrated through bar turning trials [5,6].
MAZAK investigated the influence of process and tool design on tool
wear for face milling plunging through single blade group trials with
restricted chip evacuation and simulations. For the cutting trials the
workpiece material was 16MnCr5 and the blades were made of type K30

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: m.kamratowski@wzl.rwth-aachen.de (M. Kamratowski).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2023.204787
Received 30 September 2022; Received in revised form 23 December 2022; Accepted 12 January 2023
Available online 31 March 2023
0043-1648/© 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
M. Kamratowski et al.
carbide coated with one layer of AlCrN. With respect to the process
parameter variation, MAZAK observed that the initial feed fz,1 of the feed
ramp has the highest influence on the tool wear. Furthermore, the
highest tool life was achieved for cutting speeds between vc = 220 m/
min and vc = 240 m/min and feeds between fz,1 = 0.16 mm and fz,1 =
0.18 mm. The dominant wear form for all trials was abrasive wear along
the main cutting edge of the blade. Based on the results of the cutting
trials, MAZAK developed a tool life model for face milling plunging based
on the workpiece deformation. [8]
HOU ET AL. set up a simulation based on finite elements for face milling
plunging. Subsequently, HOU ET AL. conducted cutting trials using a single
insert cutter made of high speed steel and both type X53 and 9310 steel
as workpiece material. After the trials, images of the worn tools were
compared to simulation results. A correlation between high tempera­
ture, high pressure areas and tool wear could be identified. [9]
An Analysis of tool wear for face hobbing plunging has only been
performed by simulation so far. HABIBI proposed a method to reduce the
tool wear in face hobbing plunging. By locally changing the cutting edge
geometry in a CAD-based penetration calculation, the change in working
angles was kept to a minimum, which would lead to reduced tool wear.
However, no validation of the method through cutting trials has been
performed yet. [10,11]
2. Objective and approach
While there is research on face milling plunging, the current state of
the art shows the lack of investigations on tool wear behavior in face
hobbing plunging of bevel gears. The objective of this paper is to derive
and verify an analytical model to describe the tool wear for face hobbing
plunging. To achieve the objective, the first step is to investigate the
influence of process parameters and tool geometry on the wear
behavior. For this purpose, three cutting speeds vc and three feeds fz,1
are combined in an almost full-factorial manner. In order to investigate
the influence of the tool geometry on the tool wear, the clearance angle α
and rake angle γ are varied while the wedge angle β is kept constant. The
tool angles are varied at the cutting edge as well as the tip of the stick
blade both individually and in combination. Subsequently, the influence
of the different feeds fz,1 on the maximum chip thickness hcu,max and
maximum chip length lcu,max is investigated using the manufacturing
simulation BEVELCUT. Finally, based on the experimental and simulative
results, an analytical model to describe the tool wear behavior for face
hobbing plunging of bevel gears is derived, calibrated and verified.
3. Conceptual design
3.1. Design of experiments
The investigated gear design is part of a vehicle transmission with n
= 44 teeth and a normal module of mn = 3.56 mm. The tool used for the
cutting trials was a left-hand cutterhead with a nominal cutter radius of
Rw = 76 mm and z0 = 17 blade groups consisting of an inside and an
outside blade. The cutting trials were conducted on a KLINGELNBERG C30
bevel gear cutting machine with a fully complement cutterhead under
Fig. 1. Experimental setup.
2
Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787
series production conditions. To ensure reproducible results, the tool
wear was measured using a DINO-LITE digital microscope inside the ma­
chine, cf. Fig. 1. The microscope was mounted on a fixture, which was
clamped by the workpiece holder. To obtain comparable images of the
worn tools, the microscope was positioned by moving the machine axes
with a CNC program. Images of the main cutting edge, clearance flank
and tip of the inside blade as well as the outside blade were taken. Based
on the images of the worn blades, the wear width (VB) was measured
using a software program. In addition to the tool wear, the gear geom­
etry was measured on a KLINGELNBERG P65 gear measurement machine.
In the first step, the process parameters were varied. In the cutting
trials, a degressive feed ramp was used. Hence, the feed is reduced over
the manufacturing time. The feed ramp is depicted in Fig. 1. The cutting
process starts at plunging depth TA1 with a feed of fz,1 and ends at full
plunging depth TA3 with a feed of fz,3. Only the initial feed fz,1 was
varied, because the desired surface finish is achieved during the final
cuts, which should not be changed. To investigate the influence of the
feed fz,1 at different cutting speeds vc, a full factorial design with three
feed levels at fz,1 = 0.10 mm, fz,1 = 0.12 mm and fz,1 = 0.14 mm and
three cutting speed levels at vc = 240 m/min, vc = 260 m/min and vc =
280 m/min was applied as depicted in Fig. 2. However, the cutting trial I
with a feed of fz,1 = 0.14 mm and a cutting speed of vc = 280 m/min (I)
was not conducted, because based on the results of previous trials the
combination was considered too extreme for cutting trials under series
production conditions and no knowledge was expected to be gained.
In the next step, the tool geometry was varied while the process
parameter were kept constant at a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm and a cutting
speed of vc = 240 m/min (D). The right side of Fig. 2 depicts an example
of a blade. There are three sections on the blade, namely the main cut­
ting edge (CE), the tip (T) and the clearance side (CS), between which
the rake face (RF) is located. The rake face is inclined by the rake angle
(γF), while the flank face (FF) is rotated by the clearance angle (αF).
Additionally, the tip of the blade is inclined by the tip clearance angle
(αT), while the rake face is also rotated by the tip rake angle (γT) [12].
The clearance angle α and the rake angle γ were varied on the main
cutting edge (F) and the tip (T) of the blades both individually as well as
in combination. The wedge angle β was kept constant, since it is critical
for the blade stability. The angles at the main cutting edge were varied
by Δ = ± 4◦ and at the tip by Δ = ± 2◦ compared to the reference ge­
ometry. For the trials with an even number (G06, G08, G10) the clear­
ance angle α was increased, while the rake angle γ was decreased. In
contrast, for trials with uneven numbers (G07, G09, G11) the clearance
angle α was decreased, while the rake angle γ was increased.
The cutting trials were not repeated with either the process param­
eter or the tool geometry. The influence of deviations due to random
interfering factors was considered on the one hand by small-step vari­
ation of the tool and process parameters. Irregularities in the experi­
mental results would have been noticed in the overall tendencies when
comparing the results of the individual cutting trials. On the other hand,
the cutting trials were supported by simulations, so that deviations of the
experimental results from the expected results would also have been
noticed. As there were no irregularities in the results of the cutting trials
or in the comparison between the simulation results and the results of
M. Kamratowski et al.
Fig. 2. Design of experiments for process parameters and tool geoemetry as well as the blade nomenclature
the cutting trials, the additional effort to repeat the cutting trials under
series production conditions was not justified.
3.2. Workpiece and tool characterization
The workpieces were made of 16MnCr5 (AISI 5115) case-hardening
steel, which is a typical material for bevel gears. The microstructure of
the material in transverse (a) and longitudinal (b) direction is shown in
Fig. 3. While in longitudinal direction a uniform ferrite-pearlite struc­
ture can be seen, in transverse direction a higher portion of ferrite than
perlite is present. Due to the low strength and hardness of ferrite, a
ferrite content in the microstructure leads to low cutting forces, while
the high deformability can cause increased adhesive wear [3,13]. In
comparison, pearlite has low deformability and higher hardness, which
results in high cutting forces and benefits abrasive wear [3,13].
The chemical composition of the material was determined by optical
emission spectrometry (OES), see Table 1. Except for the mass fraction of
carbon (C) and manganese (Mn), all values were within the tolerance
range required by DIN EN 10084 [14].
The characterization of the inside and outside blades is shown in
Fig. 4. The form-factor K (a) and the cutting edge radius rβ (b) were
determined at main cutting edge and the tip of the outside as well as on
the inside blades through optical measurement on an ALGONA structured-
light microscope. The mean values of the form-factor K at the outside
blade are with KOB,CE = 1.228 and KOB,T = 1.539 higher than on the
inside blade with KIB,CE = 0.998 and KIB,T = 1.392. Moreover, the
measured values of the outside blade scatter more than those of the
inside blade. The mean value of the cutting edge radius at tip of outside
blade rβ,OB,T = 11.4 μm is comparable to the inside blade rβ,IB,T = 11.7
μm, while the measurement on the cutting edge of the outside blade rβ,
OB,CE = 5.8 μm is higher than on the inside blade rβ,IB,CE = 3.8 μm.
To evaluate the tool quality, the maximum height of the roughness
profile Rz was used. On the one hand, the design of gears according to
Fig. 3. Microstructure of the workpiece material 16MnCr5 in transverse (a) and longitudinal (b) direction.
3
Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787
DIN 3990 is based on the value of Rz [15]. On the other hand, the
maximum height of the roughness profile Rz is a common roughness
parameter used in gear investigations, so that the comparability of the
presented investigation with other investigations is ensured [5,8,16].
The maximum height of the roughness profile on the flank face RzFF (c)
and the rake face RzRF (d) at the main cutting edge and tip of the outside
and inside blades were obtained through tactile measurement on a
HOMMEL ETAMIC NANOSCAN 855. The mean value of the maximum height of
the roughness profile on the flank face at the main cutting edge of the
outside blade RzFF,OB,CE = 3.5 μm is higher than the measurement on the
main cutting edge of the inside blade RzFF,IB,CE = 2.6 μm. While the
mean value of the maximum height of the roughness profile at the tip of
the outside blade Rz,FF,OB,T = 4.1 μm is comparable to the measurement
on the inside blade Rz,FF,IB,T = 4.7 μm, the measurements at the tip of
both the inside and outside blade scatter more than on the main cutting
edge. The mean values and scatter of the maximum roughness profile at
the rake face at the main cutting edge and tip of both the outside and
inside blade are comparable with RzRF,OB,CE = 2.5 μm and RzRF,IB,CE =
2.8 μm and RzRF,OB,T = 2.5 μm and RzRF,IB,T = 2.6 μm, respectively.
The optical condition of a representative outside blade is depicted on
the right side of Fig. 4 (e). Neither the rake face nor the main cutting
edge or the tip of the blade showed damages. Parallel to the rake face in
the area of the tool tip a microstructure was prepared to further analyze
the coating and substrate (f, g, h). All blades were coated in one batch
with six layers of TiAlN, which amounted to a coating thickness at the
blade’s tip of s = 6 μm (f, h). Due to the line-of-sight characteristics in
the PVD coating process, a continuous decrease of the coating thickness
towards the tooth root can be expected [17]. The blade substrate used in
the cutting trials were tungsten carbide-cobalt W–Co K30. A uniform
distribution of tungsten carbide and cobalt was observed in the tool
substrate (g). By means of energy dispersive x-ray microscopy (EDX), the
chemical composition of the tool substrate and coating was determined.
The tool substrate consisted of 98.4% tungsten carbide and 1.6% cobalt
M. Kamratowski et al. Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787

Table 1
Chemical composition of 16MnCr5.
wt% C Si Mn P S Cr Mo Ni Al Co Cu

Max boundary 0.190 0.40 1.300 0.030 0.04 1.100 0.050 0.300 0.050 0.100 0.400
Measurement 0.195 0.185 1.330 0.023 0.024 1.050 0.038 0.098 0.022 0.009 0.121
Min boundary 0.140 – 1.000 – – 0.800 – – – – –

Fig. 4. Boxplot diagrams of form-factor (a), cutting edge radius (b) and maximum height of the roughness profile on the flank face (c) and rake face (d); SEM
micrographs of tool microstructure (e), microstructure of cutting substrate (f,g) and coating (f, h).

binder, while the coating consisted of 53.4% titanium, 18.4% aluminum
and 28.2% nitrogen.
4. Analysis of wear behavior
4.1. Variation of process parameters
For investigating the influence of the feed fz,1 and cutting speed vc on
tool wear in face hobbing plunging of bevel gears, the design of exper­
iments described in Fig. 2 was used. To evaluate the cutting trial results,
the development of the maximum wear width VBmax on the main cutting
edge and tip for both the inside and the outside blade is displayed
against the number of machined workpieces N. Since no wear on the
clearance side was measured in any cutting trial, the clearance side is not
considered in the diagrams. Furthermore, images of the worn tips of the
inside and outside blade are depicted.
For all cutting speeds vc, the development of the maximum wear
width VBmax at the tip and main cutting edge of the inside blade is
comparable for all feed levels fz,1 investigated. During the cutting trials,
the maximum wear width does not exceed VBmax = 80 μm on neither the
tip nor main cutting edge of the inside blade. In addition, the images of
the worn tip of the inside blade at the end of each cutting trial show

Fig. 5. Wear development and appearances for process parameter variations A, D and G at a cutting speed of vc = 240 m/min.

4
M. Kamratowski et al.
uniformly distributed abrasive wear. The wear on the inside blade is
therefore uncritical for tool life compared to the outside blade and will
not be analyzed in more detail.
In Fig. 5 the results of the cutting trials with a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm
(A), fz,1 = 0.12 mm (D) and fz,1 = 0.14 mm (G) at a cutting speed of vc =
240 m/min are depicted. A cutting trial was terminated, when a
maximum wear width greater than VBmax = 250 μm was measured. The
wear behavior on the main cutting edge of the outside blade at a cutting
speed of vc = 240 m/min is comparable for all feed levels fz,1 investi­
gated and similar to the wear behavior on the main cutting edge of the
inside blade. Furthermore, the maximum wear width is below VBmax =
80 μm over the entire course of the wear curve and is therefore not
critical for tool life. Crucial for the tool life is the wear development at
the tip of the outside blade, since the highest maximum wear width
VBmax is measured there. During the initial wear phase until N = 150
workpieces are machined, the wear curve of the tip of the outside blade
is comparable to the other wear curves. Subsequently, however, the
slope wear curve of the tip of the outside blade is steeper. At the end of
the cutting trials, the course of the wear curves differ depending on the
feed fz,1. For a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm (A) and fz,1 = 0.14 mm (G), the
maximum wear width increases exponentially and reaches a maximum
of VBmax = 388 μm after N = 700 workpieces for a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm
(A) and of VBmax = 373 μm after N = 600 workpieces for a feed of fz,1 =
0.14 mm (G). In comparison, the maximum wear width at the end of the
cutting trial with a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm (D) increases degressively and
reaches its maximum of VBmax = 300 μm after N = 700 workpieces.
For all cutting trials, uniform abrasive wear at the tip of the inside
blade can be observed. For better orientation the main cutting edge (CE)
and clearance side (CS) is labeled in Fig. 5. The images of the worn tip of
the outside blades show breakouts with a maximum towards the main
cutting edge. With increasing feed fz,1, a change in the shape and depth
of the worn area can be seen. At a low feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm (A), results
a narrow but high worn surface. At a medium feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm (D),
the worn area is not as high as for the low feed but broader, meaning a
larger part of the tip is worn. At the high feed of fz,1 = 0.14 mm (G), the
worn area is higher than at the low feed and broader than at the medium
feed, although ΔN = 100 fewer workpieces were machined.
In Fig. 6 the results of the cutting trials with a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm
(B), fz,1 = 0.12 mm (E) and fz,1 = 0.14 mm (H) at a cutting speed of vc =
260 m/min are depicted. Compared to the cutting trials with a cutting
speed of vc = 240 m/min, the wear criterion for the following cutting
Fig. 6. Wear development and appearances for process parameter variations B, E and H at a cutting speed of vc = 260 m/min.
5
Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787
trials was reduced to VBmax = 200 μm, since the required gear quality
could not be ensured with a maximum wear width of VBmax = 250 μm.
The course of the wear curves of the main cutting edges of the outside
and inside blades and tip of the inside blade are comparable. The
maximum wear width on the main cutting edge of the outside as well as
the inside blade does not exceed a value of VBmax = 65 μm for any feed
level fz,1. Thus, the wear on the main cutting edge of the outside blade is
uncritical for tool life.
Decisive for the tool life is the wear on the tip of the outside blade.
Regardless of the feed fz,1, the course of the wear curve of the tip of the
outside blade can be compared to the main cutting edge of the outside
blade in the area of initial wear. Subsequently, the wear curve of the tip
of the outside blade has a significantly higher slope compared to the
other wear curves. The cutting trial with a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm (B)
reaches the progressive wear area at the end of the cutting trial, which
can be seen from the exponential increase of the maximum wear width
VBmax. After N = 600 workpieces, a maximum wear width of VBmax =
253 μm is measured. Neither the wear curve for a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm
(E) nor the wear curve for a feed of fz,1 = 0.14 mm (H) reach the pro­
gressive wear area. At the end of the cutting trial, the wear curve for a
feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm (E) increases degressively, while the wear curve
for a feed of fz,1 = 0.14 mm (H) continues to increase linearly. The
cutting trial with a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm (E) is terminated after N = 700
workpieces when a maximum wear width of VBmax = 207 μm was
measured and the cutting trial with a feed of fz,1 = 0.14 mm (H) after N
= 500 workpieces with a maximum wear width of VBmax = 200 μm.
For the trials with a cutting speed of vc = 260 m/min, uniform
abrasive wear occurred at the tip of the inside blade. For better orien­
tation the main cutting edge (CE) and clearance side (CS) are labeled in
Fig. 6. Furthermore, breakouts can be seen on the tip of the outside
blade, regardless of the feed fz,1, with a maximum towards the main
cutting edge. For the low feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm (B), a broad and high
worn area can be seen. For the medium feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm (E), the
worn area is narrower and not as high as for the low feed, even though
ΔN = 100 more workpieces were machined. Due to the high feed fz,1 =
0.14 mm (H), a broad worn surface with a comparable height to the
worn area of the medium feed occurs, although N = 500 workpieces
were machined with the high feed.
In Fig. 7 the results of the cutting trials with a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm
(C) and fz,1 = 0.12 mm (F) at a cutting speed of vc = 280 m/min are
depicted. The cutting trials were terminated as soon as the maximum
M. Kamratowski et al.
Fig. 7. Wear development and appearances for process parameter variations C and F at a cutting speed of vc = 280 m/min.
wear width exceeded VBmax = 200 μm. The wear behavior on the main
cutting edge of the outside blade at a cutting speed of vc = 280 m/min is
comparable both for all feed levels fz,1 investigated and to the wear
behavior on the main cutting edge of the inside blade. Furthermore, the
maximum wear width is below VBmax = 60 μm over the entire course of
the wear curve and is therefore not critical for tool life.
Since the highest maximum wear width VBmax is measured at the tip
of the outside blade, tool life is determined by its wear. During the initial
wear phase, the wear at the tip of the outside blade develops comparable
to the wear on the main cutting edge of the outside blade. Subsequently,
however, the slope of the wear curve of the tip is steeper than of the main
cutting edge of the outside blade. At the end of the cutting trials, the
wear curves for a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm (C) increases degressively and
reaches a maximum wear width of VBmax = 232 μm after N = 700
workpieces. In comparison, the wear curve for a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm
(F) increases exponentially until a maximum wear width of VBmax = 239
μm after N = 600 workpieces occurs.
Comparing the images of the tips at the end of the cutting trials of the
inside blades, both display uniform abrasive wear. For better orientation
the main cutting edge (CE) and clearance side (CS) are labeled in Fig. 7.
On the tips of the outside blades comparable wear occurs. Regardless of
the feed fz,1 breakouts with maxima towards the main cutting edge can
be observed. The worn area shows a comparable height and spread
along the tip of the outside blade for both feeds fz,1, although with a feed
of fz,1 = 0.10 mm (C) ΔN = 100 workpieces more were manufactured
than with a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm (F).
For a more detailed investigation of the influence of process pa­
rameters on tool wear, the tool life for all cutting trials was evaluated at
a maximum wear width of VBmax = 200 μm. The resulting tool life NT for
Fig. 8. Resulting tool life NT for the process parameter variations.
6
Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787
each cutting speed vc and feed fz,1 combination investigated is depicted
in Fig. 8. Increasing the cutting speed vc results in a higher temperature
in the cutting area [6,16]. By increasing the cutting speed from vc = 240
m/min to vc = 260 m/min, the tool life can be increased for all feeds fz,1.
A further increase of the cutting speed to vc = 280 m/min is accompa­
nied by a reduction of the tool life. No distinct correlation between the
wear behavior and the feed fz,1 can be established. On the one hand a
higher feed fz,1 is accompanied by a higher maximum chip thickness for
each cut and thus the maximal mechanical load on the cutting edge
increases [5,16,18]. On the other hand increasing the feed fz,1 leads to a
reduction in the number of cuts necessary to fully manufacture the tooth
gap [8,16]. For a cutting speed of vc = 260 m/min and vc = 280 m/min,
an increase in the tool life was achieved by increasing the feed from fz,1
= 0.10 mm to fz,1 = 0.12 mm. Overall, the highest tool life of NT = 571
workpieces was achieved for a cutting speed of vc = 260 m/min and feed
of fz,1 = 0.12 mm.
In conclusion, all cutting trials were terminated due to breakouts at
the tip of the outside blade. On the tip of each outside blade significantly
higher wear occurred compared to the inside blade regardless of the
cutting speed vc and feed fz,1. The higher wear on the outside compared
to the inside blade is due to the process kinematics and positioning of the
blades inside the cutterhead. The outside blade is placed in front of the
inside blade and thus, cuts the workpiece before the inside blade. The
local maximum at the tip of the outside blades towards the main cutting
edge can be attributed to the multi-flank chip formation during bevel
gear cutting, due to which the tool corner is exposed to significantly
higher mechanical and thermal load compared to the other parts of the
blade’s profile [6,19,20]. More favorable wear behavior was observed
for a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm compared to the other feeds fz,1 investigated.
M. Kamratowski et al. Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787

At a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm, the worn area was spread out broader comparable to the wear curve of the tip of the outside blade of tool
instead of higher on the tip of the outside blade. This resulted in a lower geometry G06. However, at the end of the cutting trial the maximum
maximum wear width VBmax and thus higher tool life. In addition, for a wear width VBmax increases degressively. After N = 750 workpieces
cutting speed of vc = 260 m/min the wear could be reduced in com­ were machined, a maximum wear width at the tip of the outside blade of
parison to a cutting speed of vc = 240 m/min and vc = 280 m/min. This VBmax = 225 μm was measured. All cutting trials were terminated,
is attributed to the correlation between coating cutting performance because the wear criterion was achieved on the tip of the outside blade.
versus the cutting speed and the impact resistance versus the tempera­ Comparing the images of the tips at the end of the cutting trials of the
ture. Hence, there are cutting speed regions associated with an improved inside blades, all display uniform abrasive wear with a low wear width
performance of coated tools [21]. VB. For better orientation the main cutting edge (CE) and clearance side
(CS) are labeled in Fig. 9. At the tips of the outside blades also compa­
rable wear occurs. Regardless of the tool geometry breakouts with a
4.2. Variation of tool geometry
maximum in the direction of the main cutting edge can be observed. The
worn area shows a comparable height and spread along the tip of the
To investigate the influence of the tool geometry on the tool wear
outside blade, although with tool geometry G08 ΔN = 100 workpieces
behavior, cutting trials according to the design of experiments depicted
and with tool geometry G10 ΔN = 50 workpieces more were manufac­
in Fig. 2 were conducted. For the cutting trials the process parameters
tured than with a tool geometry G06.
according to cutting trial D with a cutting speed of vc = 240 m/min and
The tool designs G06, G08 and G10 have in common that on either the
feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm were used. Fig. 9 shows the maximum wear width
main cutting edge, the tip or both the clearance angle α has been
VBmax measured on the tip and main cutting edge of the inside and
increased, while the rake angle γ has been decreased. The clearance angle
outside blade for tool geometries G06, G08 and G10 plotted against the
α influences the geometry of the workpiece and the heat input into the
number of manufactured workpieces N. Neither on the clearance side of
cutting edge [1,3]. With a small clearance angle α, the contact area
the outside nor of the inside blade significant wear was observed. A trial
between the flank face of the tool and the workpiece surface is increased.
was terminated when a maximum wear width of VBmax = 200 μm was
On the one hand, this results in a better heat transfer between tool and
measured.
workpiece. On the other hand, it causes more friction between the two
Regardless of the tool geometry, the wear curve of the main cutting
surfaces [3,8]. The rake angle γ influences the cutting force and
edge and tip of the inside blade as well as the cutting edge of the outside
temperature at the cutting wedge [1]. In the cutting process, the chip is
blade display a comparable course. Comparing the wear curves, the
formed according to the rake angle γ, since the chip flows along the rake
highest maximum wear widths VBmax occur for tool geometry G08.
face [2]. An increased rake angle γ thus results in lower deformation and
However, the maximum wear width VBmax at the end of each trial is
higher cutting force, since the pressure on the cutting edge as well as the
comparable for all investigated tool designs and does not exceed VBmax
rake face decreases [4,8]. The cutting trials show, that increasing the
= 80 μm. Hence the wear on the inside blade and main cutting edge of
clearance angle α has a positive effect on tool wear for the investigated
the outside blade is uncritical for tool life.
gear and tool geometry. The greatest influence on tool wear was observed
For all tool designs investigated, the highest wear occurred at the tip
for a change in the tip angles, where also the highest wear occurred.
of the outside blade, which thus determined the tool life. For the cutting
The results of the cutting trials indicate that the clearance angles α
trial with the tool geometry G06, the maximum wear width VBmax in­
both at the main cutting edge and tip were chosen with a very small
creases almost linearly and reaches a value of VBmax,T-OB = 230 μm after
amount in the reference design. This assumption is confirmed by the
N = 700 workpieces. For tool geometry G08, the course of the wear
results of the cutting trials with the tool geometries G07, G09 and G11,
curve of the tip of the outside blade displays the course of a character­
which were terminated after machining one workpiece each. In Fig. 10
istic wear curve including the initial, linear and progressive area [3,13].
the flank face of the outside blade with geometry G07 after machining
At the end of the cutting trial, the maximum wear width VBmax increases
one workpiece is depicted (a). Abrasive wear on the flank face of the
exponentially until after N = 800 workpieces a maximum wear width of
outside blade occurred, which indicates that the flank face of the outside
VBmax, = 272 μm is measured. For tool geometry G10, the wear curve is

Fig. 9. Wear development and appearances for tool designs G06, G08 and G10.

7
M. Kamratowski et al. Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787

Fig. 10. Flank face of outside blade with geometry G07 after machining one workpiece (a) and geometry measurement of the tooth flanks (b).

blade made contact with the workpiece during manufacturing. In blades. The following values were measured on the blades with tool
addition, a step can be seen on the measurement of the flank geometry geometry G08, but are representative for the measurements on the
(b). For the tool geometries G07, G09 and G11, the clearance angle α has blades with tool designs G06 and G10. An EDX analysis at position a on
been decreased, while the rake angle γ has been increased. Since the the rake face of the inside and position b on the rake face of the outside
clearance angle α influences the contact area between tool and work­ blade showed high values for Mn, Cr, Fe and O as well as traces of Si, Ti
piece, it is assumed that the clearance angle α was too small. As a result, and Al, see Table 2. The high measurements of Mn and Cr in combina­
in addition to the main cutting edge, the flank face of the outside blade tion with the low measurements of Ti and Al indicate fragments of
made contact with the workpiece. Thus, the material was not cut workpiece material, which adhered to the tool substrate. In addition, the
properly, but rather ploughing effects did occur, which resulted in the Fe and O values indicate the formation of iron oxide compounds, which
step on the convex flank (b). Since with the tool geometries G07, G09 are formed at high temperatures and can consists of two or more layers
and G11 not a single workpiece within tolerances could be manufac­ (FeO, Fe3O4 and Fe2O3) [16].
tured, the cutting trials are not considered in the following. In the SEM micrographs, two different layers at the tip and main
In Fig. 11, the worn inside and outside blades of the cutting trials cutting edge of each blade can be distinguished by their color: A layer
with tool designs G06, G08 and G10 are compared by means of SEM near the main cutting edge, that appears light grey in the SEM image and
micrographs. Almost identical wear phenomena at the respective loca­ a dark grey layer adjacent to the light grey layer that continues in the
tion on the outside as well as the inside blade was observed. Neither on direction of the chip flow towards the rake face. No discoloration can be
the clearance side of the inside nor the outside blade wear occurs, since seen on the clearance side of either the inside or outside blade, since it is
it is not involved in the cutting process. On the main cutting edge and tip not involved in the cutting process. In order to compare the measure­
of the inside blade abrasive wear occurred. Abrasive wear could also be ments of the grey areas to the actual coating, an area without an opti­
observed at the main cutting edge and tip of the outside blade. However, cally visible layer at position g was analyzed, see Table 3. An element
on the tip of the outside blade also breakout occurred. Consequently, the mapping of the light grey area at the positions c and d shows high values
comparatively high wear widths on the outside blade are not due to for Ti, Al, N and traces of O, see Table 3. In comparison, analyses of the
solely abrasive wear. The position of the worn areas is comparable for all
geometries. For tool geometry G06 the worn area is narrow and high.
Table 2
Whereas, in comparison, the worn area for tool geometry G08 extends EDX analysis at positions a and b.
over a wider area of the tip. For tool geometry G10, the size and location
Position Mn [%] Cr [%] Fe [%] O [%] Si [%] Ti [%] Al [%]
of the worn area is comparable to tool geometry G08, although the
breakouts are more pronounced. a 38.8 20 19.9 19.4 4 2.3 0.5
EDX analyses were performed at various positions of the worn b 24.3 7.9 48.1 15.4 2.3 1.5 0.5

Fig. 11. SEM micrographs of worn inside and outside blade of tool geometries G06, G08 and G10.

8
M. Kamratowski et al. Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787

Table 3 conducted for the following process increment. Once the entire process
EDX analysis at positions c, d, e, f and g. is simulated, process characteristics such as the maximum chip thickness
Position Ti Al N O Fe Ca Mn Si Mg hcu,max or maximum chip length lcu,max are derived from the undeformed
[%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] chip geometry. The distribution of the process characteristics along the
c 48.1 35.0 14.7 2.2 – – – – – unrolled profile edge s gives indications about tool wear. For example,
d 49.7 34.2 14.9 1.2 – – – – – the maximum chip thickness hcu,max can be used to determine the load at
e – 51.5 – 29.0 2.7 12.2 3.1 0.9 0.6 individual points of the blade’s profile during the cutting process. The
f – 51.0 – 31 2.1 9 4.3 2.0 0.6 maximum cutting length lcu,max represents the contact time between tool
g 58.5 20.4 13,1 3.4 4.6
and workpiece [8].
– – – –

Since BEVELCUT is based on a planar penetration algorithm, the cut­

elements in the dark grey area at positions e and f show high values for
Al, O, Ca, Mn and Fe and traces of Si and Mg, see Table 3. TiAlN-coatings
are known for the formation of hard Al2O3 films at high operating
temperatures [16,21]. From the element mapping it can be seen, that the
formation of these layers starts in the light grey area and continues in the
dark grey area. The thermal conductivity of Al2O3-films decreases, with
an increasing temperature in the cutting zone [21,22]. Hence, on the one
hand, the aluminum compound film insulates the tool substrate at high
temperature. On the other hand, due to the high hardness and chemical
stability the presence of an Al2O3-film reduces the abrasive and diffusive
wear and promotes the tool stability [16]. Depending on the tool ge­
ometry, no significant difference in the composition of the layers could
be determined at the end of each cutting trial.
5. Simulative analysis
The simulative analysis was performed with the manufacturing
simulation BEVELCUT. The input data includes the workpiece and tool
geometry as well as the process parameters. First, the tool and workpiece
are discretizes. For discretization, the workpiece is divided into sectional
planes perpendicular to the axis of the workpiece rotation. The blade’s
profile of the tool is described as a two dimensional curve, which is
rotated around the tool axis to generate the tool enveloping body. For
the actual penetration calculation, both the tool and the workpiece ge­
ometry are positioned according to the machine and process kinematics.
Subsequently, the tool profile is projected onto each intersecting plane
between the tool and workpiece geometry. The points of intersection
between the intersecting plane and the projected tool profile determine
the cross-section. The cross-section of all intersecting planes are used to
compose the chip and gap geometry. The tool and updated workpiece
geometry are then repositioned and the penetration calculation is
ting speed vc does not influence the simulation results [8]. Moreover, the
evaluation of the wear behavior due to the tool geometry variation
indicated that both the location and the magnitude of the wear
maximum do not differ significantly. Hence, in the following solely the
influence of the feed levels fz,1 on the process characteristics is analyzed.
In Fig. 12 the distribution of the maximum chip thickness hcu,max and the
maximum chip length lcu,max are depicted along the unrolled profile
edge s of the outside blade. For better orientation, the tip (T) as well as
the main cutting edge (CE) and clearance side (CS) are highlighted in the
diagrams.
For all investigated feed levels fz,1 the maximum chip thickness hcu,
max is almost constant along the main cutting edge of the outside blade.
Towards the tip, the maximum chip thickness hcu,max increases signifi­
cantly and reaches its maximum. The maxima differ depending on the
feed fz,1. For a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm the maximum chip thickness is hcu,
max = 0.122 mm, while for a feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm a value of hcu,max =
0.148 mm and for a feed of fz,1 = 0.14 mm a value of hcu,max = 0.210 mm
is calculated. Subsequently the maximum chip thickness hcu,max de­
creases and is nearly constant along the clearance side.
The distribution of the maximum chip length lcu,max along the
unrolled profile edge s of the outside blade is not affected by the change
in feed fz,1. For all three investigated feed levels fz,1 the maximum chip
length lcu,max is nearly constant along the main cutting edge at around
lcu,max = 40 mm. At the tip, the maximum chip length lcu,max increases
sharply and reaches its maximum at lcu,max = 55.446 mm before
decreasing to lcu,max = 11 mm at the end of the tip and towards the
clearance side. Along the clearance side the maximum chip length de­
creases degressively.
Identically to the outside blade, the maximum chip thickness hcu,max
and maximum chip length lcu,max were evaluated along the unrolled
profile edge s of the inside blade, cf. Fig. 13. It should be noted that,

Fig. 12. Influence of the feed fz,1 on the maximum chip thickness hcu,max and maximum chip length lcu,max on the outside blade.

9
M. Kamratowski et al.
compared to the outside blade, the main cutting edge of the inside blade
is on the opposite side. This is due to the fact that during manufacturing
the main cutting edge of the outside blade cuts the concave flank and the
main cutting edge of the inside flank the opposite convex flank [1].
While the distribution of the maximum chip thickness hcu,max of the
inside blade is not influenced by the feed fz,1, the magnitude changes.
Along the main cutting edge, the maximum chip thickness hcu,max is
nearly constant. Towards the tip of the blade, the maximum chip
thickness hcu,max increases significantly until the global maximum of hcu,
max = 0.089 mm for a feed of fz,1 = 0.10 mm, hcu,max = 0.011 mm for a
feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm and hcu,max = 0.134 mm for a feed fz,1 = 0.14 mm
is reached. Along the clearance side, the maximum uncut chip thickness
hcu,max is again nearly constant.
Neither the distribution nor the magnitude of the maximum uncut
chip length lcu,max along the unrolled profile edge s of the inside blade
change depending on the feed fz,1. Along the main cutting edge and
towards the tip, the maximum uncut chip length lcu,max increases slightly
until the maximum of lcu,max = 55.277 mm occurs at the tip. At the end
of the tip towards the clearance side, the maximum uncut chip length lcu,
max decreases significantly lcu,max = 14,874 mm and subsequently de­
creases degressively along the clearance side.
Comparing the distribution of the maximum chip thickness hcu,max
along the unrolled profile edge of the outside and inside blade no in­
fluence of the feed fz,1 can be observed. However, the maxima of the
maximum chip thickness hcu,max increase with an increasing feed fz,1 for
the outside as well as inside blade. Furthermore, for all investigated feed
levels fz,1, the maxima of the maximum chip thickness hcu,max are
significantly higher for the outside than the inside blade. This is due to
the process kinematics and positioning of the blades inside the cutter­
head. The outside blade is placed in front of the inside blade and thus,
cuts the workpiece before the inside blade. In contrast, neither the dis­
tribution nor the magnitude of the maximum chip length lcu,max along
the unrolled profile edge of the outside or inside blade is influenced by a
change in feed fz,1. Additionally, the maxima of the maximum chip
length lcu,max are comparable for the outside and inside blade. Moreover,
the maxima of both the maximum chip thickness hcu,max and the
maximum chip length lcu,max occur approximately within the same area
at the tip of the outside as well as the inside blade. Hence, due to the
higher maximum chip thickness hcu,max at the outside compared to the
inside blade, a higher mechanical load is to be expected at the tip of the
outside blade [8,23]. In comparison, because of the comparable
Fig. 13. Influence of the feed fz,1 on the maximum chip thickness hcu,max and maximum chip length lcu,max on the inside blade.
10
Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787
maximum chip length lcu,max on the outside and inside blade, the contact
time between tool and workpiece is also comparable for the outside and
inside blade. In conclusion, the highest wear for all investigated feed
levels fz,1 is to be expected at the tip of the outside blade, since the
highest maximum chip thickness hcu,max occur there, as well as the
maximum of the maximum chip thickness hcu,max and maximum chip
length lcu,max coincide [8,23].
6. Calibration of a tool wear model
The approach to modelling tool wear in face hobbing plunging is
analogous to MAZAK’S approach to tool wear modelling in face milling
plunging based on the elastic workpiece deformation. For this purpose,
existing verified models are combined, since, for example, no verified
models exist for calculating the thrust force FD in bevel gear milling. For
face hobbing plunging, the same models used by MAZAK for face milling
plunging are used to calculate the thrust force FD and the shear angle φ.
However, due to the different contact conditions in face hobbing
compared to face milling, the model approach has to be adjusted
accordingly. Finally, the verified models are combined into a tool wear
model. Compared to MAZAK’S model where the mean wear width VBmean
is predicted, the tool wear model for face hobbing plunging allows the
prediction of the maximum wear width VBmax based on the workpiece
and tool geometry, process parameters as well as the process charac­
teristics. [8]
6.1. Model setup
Same as MAZAK’S model for tool wear in face milling plunging, the
tool wear model for face hobbing plunging is based on the assumption of
KÜHN that with increasing work due to frictional force the abrasive tool
wear has to increase. Abrasive wear as well as cutting work increase
during the cutting process. To establish the modeling approach, KÜHN
assumed that a contact surface is created between the workpiece and the
flank face of the tool. The contact surface is formed by the elastic
workpiece deformation immediately after the cutting process. In reality,
when considering the surface topography the contact surface is curved.
However, for modeling of the wear development KÜHN assumed a two-
dimensional contact surface, which can be described by a character­
istic length lk with constant width. Furthermore, KÜHN considered the
thrust force FD, which is perpendicular to the cutting force FC and thus in
M. Kamratowski et al. Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787

the same direction as the assumed main elastic deformation. The thrust clearance angle at the tip of the blade αT.
force FD is related to the chip width b and hence referred to as the
Δl
specific thrust force FD . Moreover, KÜHN considered the tool life N in the
′
ε= (4)
l
model as well as the empirical factors a and c, which take the workpiece
and tool material into account. [24] Δl = lk • sin (αT ) (5)

(1) Finally, Eq. (4) and Eq. (3) are substituted in Eq. (2), which is
′ c
KV = lk • FD • a • N
transformed according to the contact length lK. Hence, the contact
For face hobbing plunging of bevel gears, the highest tool wear was length between the workpiece and blade’s tip can be determined.
measured on the tip of the outside blade during the cutting trials √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
regardless of the process parameter or tool geometry. Additionally, both ′
FD • l
the highest chip thickness hcu,max and the highest chip length lcu,max lK = (6)
E • sin (αT ) • cos (αT )
occurred at the tip of the outside blade. Hence, instead of the flank wear,
the wear on the blade’s tip is critical to determine the tool life and thus The thrust force FD was determined using the model OF LEE AND
modeled in the following. SHAFFER, which considers a coefficient for the workpiece material kdyn,
Through the manufacturing simulation BEVELCUT, the chip charac­ the chip thickness hcu, the chip width b and the shear angle φ [25].
teristics are calculated resolved in time and location along the blade’s
FD = − kdyn • hcu • b • (cot(φ) − 1) (7)
profile. Combined with the local cutting speed, the chip characteristics
are used to determine the thrust force, which is required to calculate the The shear angle φ was determined analytically considering the fric­
elastic workpiece deformation. Thus, the contact length lK also needs to tion angle ϱ and rake angle γ according to MERCHANT. The rake angle γ
be determined along the blade’s profile. In Fig. 14 a two-dimensional used was the tip rake angle γT and the friction angle ϱ was considered a
diagram of a blade during the cutting process is depicted, in which the model parameter and determined by regression analysis [26].
relevant increments along the blade’s profile to model the tool wear at
π 1
the blade’s tip are highlighted. During face hobbing plunging, the di­ φ = − (ϱ − γ) (8)
4 2
rection of the feed velocity vf resulting from the feed fz is perpendicular
to the workpiece. Hence, the thrust force FD causes the workpiece to be To consider the non-linear influence of the cutting speed vc and chip
elastically deformed beneath the blade’s tip, resulting in the contact thickness hcu, the linear part of the thrust force FD according to LEE AND
length lK between the workpiece and blade. The calculation of the SHAFFER, meaning the product of the material coefficient kdyn, the chip
contact length lK is based on HOOKE’S LAW to calculate YOUNG’S MODULUS E. thickness hcu and chip width b, was replaced by the calculation of the
thrust force FD according to GUTMANN. GUTMANN takes the chip width b,
σ
E= (2) the specific cutting speed vc* normalized to the unit m/min and chip
ε
thickness hcu related to the corner radius ρ into account. The model
The stress σ can be calculated on the basis of the resultant force F on parameters aij, which are used to calculate the coefficients Ai, depend on
the one hand, and on the basis of the thrust force FD on the other hand. the combination of workpiece and cutting material and are taken from
The forces are each related to the chip width b. Since increments of the literature [20,27,28].
unrolled profile edge are considers in the calculations, the chip width b ( ( ∗ ))
( ) ( )
is constant. Hence, the related forces are used.
hcu
/ ∗
FD = b • A1 v∗c • h∗cu + A2 v∗c • 1 − e A3 (vc ) (9)
′ ′ ′
F F F F FD
σ= = = = = (3) vc ∗
A b • l l lk lk • cos (αT ) Ai = ai1 + ai2 • e /ai3 (10)
The strain rate can also be determined by relating the penetration
vc
depth Δl to the total length l. Depending on the blade’s position, v∗c = (11)
1 m/min
different total lengths l exist on the gear. In this model, the chordal tooth
thickness smn was assumed as the total length l. Additionally, the
penetration depth can be derived geometrically with the help of the

Fig. 14. Contact length lK between the blade’s tip and the workpiece.

11
M. Kamratowski et al. Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787

hcu according to the results from section 5. The maximum chip width bmax
h∗cu = (12)
ρ for cutting with the blade’s tip corresponds to the tip width w, which is
defined in the tool design. Based on the training data set, the model
The above mentioned models are substituted in Eq. (1). Hence, Eq.
parameters ϱ, c and d are determined through multi-variable regression
(13) results to determine the maximum wear width VBmax at the blade’s
[30]. To solve the nonlinear least square problem, the LEV­
tip for face hobbing plunging. To consider the continuous pitch during
ENBERG-MARQUARDQT algorithm was chosen, which combines the gradient
face hobbing, the tool wear model takes the relationship between the
descent and the GAUSS-NEWTON method [32,33]. The initial values for the
number of blade groups z0 and number of workpiece teeth n into ac­
multi-variable regression were taken from MAZAK’S model, due to the
count.
comparable tool designs and process parameters as well as tool and

√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅(( ( ( ))) ( ( ) /
))32 (
smn ( ) ( ) h∗cu,max
/A3 (v∗c ) π 1 z0 )
VBmax = • bmax • A1 v∗c • h∗cu,max + A2 v∗c • 1 − e • cot − (ϱ − γT ) − 1 • c− 2 • • Nd (13)
sin(αT ) • cos(αT ) • E 4 2 n

workpiece materials used for calibration [8]. The algorithm was termi­
nated due the relative magnitude of the search direction being smaller
than the step tolerance of 1e− 6. The resulting model parameters ϱ, c and
hcu,max
h∗cu,max = (14) d as well as GUTMANN coefficients A1, A2, and A3 are given in Fig. 15.
ρ
To illustrate the fit between the modeled and measured maximum
wear width VBmax, both wear curves for the inside blade of the cutting
6.2. Validation of the tool wear model
trial with process parameter variation C is shown. The measured
maximum wear width VBmax is represented by the dark blue dots, while
To determine the model parameters and verify the model, the wear
the modeled wear curve is given in light blue. The wear curve of the
measurements from the cutting trials are split randomly into a training
model matches the measurements well. The residuals of the test data set
and test data set [29,30]. The training data set contains 80% of the
are calculated as the difference between the measured maximum wear
measurements and is used to determine the model parameters, whereas
width VBmax, measured and modeled maximum wear width VBmax, model.
the remaining 20% are part of the test data set for verifying the model
The distribution of the residuals shows that 50% of all deviation range
[30,31].
− 12.953 μm and 9.439 μm with the exception of a few outliers in both
As can be seen from the analysis of the process characteristics in
positive and negative direction.
section 5, the value of the process characteristics changes along the
To verify the model results, an equivalence test is conducted [29,31].
unrolled profile edge of the blade. Since the chip thickness hcu and chip
The model cannot be verified through the coefficient of determination R2
width b are used for the calculation of the thrust force FD (Eq. (9)), the
since, on the one hand, the presented tool wear model does not possess a
value of the thrust force FD also changes along the unrolled profile edge
linear relationship between the model variables and the maximum wear
of the blade. However, with the tool wear model presented, the
width VBmax [31]. On the other hand, a linearization of the equation is not
maximum wear width VBmax is calculated after a defined number of
possible due to the complexity of the combined underlying models [31].
workpieces N is manufactured. Hence, constant values, namely the
As a matter of principle, empirical data cannot be verified but only
maxima, are assumed for the chip thickness hcu and chip width b and
falsified [34]. Hence, to verify a model, it has to be proven that the
thus the thrust force FD. For the chip thickness hcu, the maximum chip
falsification fails [34]. Therefore, the objective of the equivalence test is
thickness hcu,max calculated for each combination of tool and process
to reject the null hypotheses H0 that the model is not verified. Thus,
parameters through the manufacturing simulation BEVELCUT is used

Fig. 15. Determined model parameters, the distribution of residuals and equivalence tests for the training data.

12
M. Kamratowski et al.
according to the alternative hypotheses H1, that the model is verified, is
accepted [31].
To conduct equivalence testing, the difference between the measured
and modeled maximum wear width ΔVB, which equals the residuals, is
chosen as the quantifiable metric to define the limits of equivalence δ1/2.
The equivalence limits are chosen as δ1 = − 10 μm and δ2 = 10 μm. The
null hypotheses H0 states that the residuals are smaller than ΔVB = − 10
μm or greater than ΔVB = 10 μm. Accordingly, the alternative hypotheses
H1 is that the residuals are within the equivalence limits δ1/2. [31]
The level of significance α equals the probability of rejecting the null
hypothesis H0 even though it is true. Based on the level of significance,
the confidence interval CI is calculated. The degree of freedom DF equals
the number of data points used in the equivalence test. In order to
conduct an equivalence test, it is recommended to use a data set with a
number of measurements of DF > 30. The p-value states the probability
of accepting the null hypotheses H0. If the p-value is lower than the level
of significance α, the null hypothesis H0 is rejected and the alternative
hypotheses H1 applies. When choosing the limits of equivalence δ1/2, it
has to be considered that they affect the calculation of the t-values,
which are used to determine the p-values. [29,31]
The level of significance is defined as α = 5%. This has proven a
reasonable value since lower levels of significance are choses for high-
risk applications in medicine [30,31]. Since the training data set con­
tained 136 measurements, the requirement of DF > 30 was met. The
resulting p-values are below the level of significance α. Thus, the null
hypothesis H0 is rejected and the alternative hypothesis H1, that the
residuals of the model are within the limits of equivalence, applies.
Furthermore, the confidence interval C = [− 5.359; 1.417] is within the
limits of equivalence δ1/2. In summary, with a probability of 95% the
deviation between the measured and modeled maximum wear width is
within − 10 μm < ΔVB<10 μm. Therefore, the model parameters are
verified.
To verify the model itself, an equivalence test with the test data set
was performed and thus with measurements on which the model pa­
rameters had not been trained on. The test data set contained DF = 35
measurements, so the condition of DF > 30 measurements was fulfilled.
A sample representation of the wear curve resulting from the model is
given in light blue on the left of Fig. 16. The maximum wear width VBmax
for the inside and outside blade measured for cutting trials with tool
geometry G08 is represented in dark blue dots. As the wear curve in light
blue illustrates, the wear curve of the model matches the measurements
well. Furthermore, the distribution of the residuals shows that 50% of all
deviation are within the range of − 6.759 μm to1.083 μm with the
exception of a few outliers in both positive and negative direction.
For the equivalence test, the level of significance α = 5% as well as
Fig. 16. Fit of the model, the distribution of residuals and equivalence tests for the test data.
13
Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787
the limits of equivalence δ1 = − 10 μm and δ2 = 10 μm are kept constant.
Moreover, the null hypothesis H0 and alternative hypothesis H1 are
equal to the hypothesis for the equivalence test for the training data.
Since the resulting p-values are below the level of significance α, the null
hypothesis H0 is rejected and the alternative hypothesis H1 applies. The
precise confidence interval is CI = [− 4.542; 5.716]. In conclusion, with
a probability of 95%, the deviation between the measured and modeled
maximum wear width in the interval of − 10 μm < ΔVB <10 μm. Thus,
the model is verified.
7. Conclusion
The wear investigations and theoretical considerations carried out
contribute to a better understanding of face hobbing plunging of bevel
gears. Moreover, the results provide an opportunity to improve the
performance of the process. The influence of process parameters and
tool geometry on the wear behavior was investigated by means of cut­
ting trials under series production conditions as well as by simulation
using the manufacturing simulation BEVELCUT. The workpiece material
used in the cutting trials was 16MnCr5 case-hardening steel and the
tools were made of type K30 carbide with TiAlN multilayer coating.
Based on the results of the cutting trials and the simulation, a tool wear
model was derived and validated, taking into account the elastic
deformation of the workpiece. The key findings can be summarized as
follows:
(1) Regardless of the process parameters or tool geometry, all cutting
trials were terminated due to the wear criterion being met by
wear at the tip of the outside blade. Abrasive wear was found to
be the main wear mechanism. SEM micrographs also showed
breakouts at the tip of the outside blade, which accounted for the
significantly higher wear width compared to the inside blade.
(2) For the process parameter variation, tool wear could be reduced
by increasing the cutting speed from vc = 240 m/min to vc = 260
m/min. However, no clear influence of the feed fz,1 was observed.
The highest tool life was obtained at a cutting speed of vc = 260
m/min and feed of fz,1 = 0.12 mm.
(3) By varying the tool geometry for the gear case presented, the tool
life could also be increased by increasing the clearance angle αT
while decreasing the rake angle γT at the tip of the blade. It has
also been observed that if the clearance angle on either the main
cutting edge αF or at the tip αT is too small, the flank face of the
blade will make contact with the workpiece during
manufacturing in addition to the main cutting edge. As a result,
the gear quality cannot be maintained.
M. Kamratowski et al.
(4) For the simulative analysis, no influence of the feed fz,1 on the
maximum chip length lcu,max was observed. In contrast, the
maximum chip thickness hcu.max increased with increasing feed
fz,1. The maxima of the maximum chip thickness hcu,max and the
maximum chip length lcu,max occurred at the tip of the inside and
outside blade, respectively. However, the values of the maxima at
the outside blade were significantly higher than those at the in­
side blade.
(5) A model for predicting tool wear at the tip of the blade based on
the elastic deformation of the workpiece was calibrated. The
model was parametrized by multivariate regression and validated
by equivalence tests. With a probability of 95%, the deviation
between the measured and modeled maximum wear width is
within the interval of − 10 μm < ΔVB<10 μm.
(6) As long as the combination of workpiece and cutting material is
constant, the presented tool wear model can be used to optimize
further bevel gear cases. The applicability to other bevel gear
cases is given due to the simulative calculation of the maximum
chip thickness hcu,max used in the model as well as the consider­
ation of process parameters and tool geometry in the model. For
different combinations of workpiece and cutting material, the
model coefficients aij have to be taken from literature or deter­
mined in orthogonal cutting tests according to GUTMANN’S pro­
cedure [27].
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support by the German
Research Foundation (DFG) [BE2542/22–1, 389555551] and the WZL
Gear Research Circle for the achievement of the project results.
References
[1] Klingelnberg J. Bevel Gear, Fundamentals and Applications, Springer Berlin/
Heidelberg, 2016.
[2] H. Stadtfeld, Gleason Bevel Gear Technology: the Science of Gear Engineering and
Modern Manufacturing Methods for Angular Transmissions, The Gleason Works,
Rochester, New York, 2014.
[3] F. Klocke, C. Brecher, Zahnrad- und Getriebetechnik: Auslegung - Herstellung -
Untersuchung - Simulation, first ed., Carl Hanser, Munich, 2017.
[4] A. Klein, Spiral Bevel and Hypoid Gear Tooth Cutting with Coated Carbide Tools
Diss, RWTH Aachen University, 2006.
[5] C. Brecher, C. Gorgels, A. Hardjosuwito, Simulation based tool wear analysis in
bevel gear cutting. In: VDI, in: International Conference on Gears; 4. - 6. Oktober
2010; Garching, Düsseldorf: VDI, 2010.
[6] F. Klocke, C. Gorgels, S. Herzhoff, Tool load during multi-flank chip formation,
Adv. Mater. Res. 223 (2011) 525–534. http://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.
net/AMR.223.525.
[7] C. Brecher, C. Gorgels, A. Hardjosuwito, Simulation methods for beveloid gears, in:
C. Brecher, F. Klocke (Eds.), 3rd WZL Gear Conference in the USA, Oktober 2010,
Boulder, Colorado, 2010, 13./14.
14
Wear 524-525 (2023) 204787
[8] J. Mazak, Method for Optimizing the Tool and Process Design for Bevel Gear
Plunging Processes Diss, RWTH Aachen, 2021.
[9] F. Hou, Y. Zhang, S. Wasif, P. Mattson, K. Marusich, Reducing Tool Wear in Spiral
Bevel Gear Machining with the Finite Element Method, Gear Solutions, December,
2019, pp. 34–40.
[10] M. Habibi, Tool Wear Improvement and Machining Parameter Optimization in
Non-generated Face-Hobbing of Bevel Gears Diss, Concordia University, Montreal,
2016.
[11] M. Habibi, Z. Chen, Z. Fang, Tool wear improvement in face-hobbing of bevel gears
by Re-designing the cutting blades, IFAC-PapersOnLine 48 (2015) 1888–1893.
[12] D.I.N. Begriffe der Zerspantechnik, Bewegungen und Geometrie des
Zerspanvorganges Oktober, Beuth, Berlin, 1985.
[13] F. Klocke, Manufacturing Processes 1: Cutting, Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, 2011.
[14] D.I.N. Einsatzstähle, Technische Lieferbedingungen, Beuth, Berlin, Juni 2008.
[15] Norm Tragfähigkeitsberechnungen von Stirnrädern, Betriebsfestigkeitsrechnung,
Beuth, Berlin, December 1994.
[16] N. Troß, J. Brimmers, T. Bergs, Tool wear in dry gear hobbing of 20MnCr5 case-
hardening steel, 42CrMo4 tempered steel and EN-GJS-700-2 cast iron, Wear 476
(2021), 203737, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2021.203737.
[17] D. Mattox, Handbook of Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD) Processing, second ed.,
William Andrew, Norwich, 2010.
[18] C. Brecher, C. Löpenhaus, J. Mazak, Manufacturing simulation for bevel gear
cutting based on a two-dimensional penetration calculation, in: V.D.
I. Wissensforum (Ed.), International Conference on Gears; 05.10. - 06.10.2015;
München, first ed., VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf, 2015, pp. 1387–1398.
[19] F. Klocke, M. Brumm, J. Staudt, Prediction of dominant failure modes of tools for
machining of bevel gears, in: International Tooling Conference, Leoben, 2012,
pp. 533–541. September 11. - 14. 2012.
[20] F. Klocke, C. Gorgels, G.-T. Weber, R. Schalaster, Prognosis of the local tool wear in
gear finish hobbing, Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 5 (2011) 651–657, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11740-011-0343-9.
[21] K.-D. Bouzakis, N. Michailidis, G. Skordaris, E. Bouzakis, D. Biermann,
R. M’Saoubi, Cutting with coated tools: coating technologies, characterization
methods and performance optimization, CIRP Ann. 61 (2012) 703–723, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2012.05.006.
[22] F. Klocke, T. Schröder, E. Bouzakis, A. Klein, Manipulation of coating and
subsurface properties in reconditioning of WC–Co carbide cutting tools, Surf.
Coating. Technol. 202 (2007) 1194–1198, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
surfcoat.2007.06.023.
[23] C. Brecher, F. Klocke, M. Brumm, A. Hardjosuwito, Simulation based model for tool
life prediction in bevel gear cutting, J. Inst. Eng. Prod. 7 (2013) 223–231, https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11740-012-0439-x.
[24] F. Kühn, C. Löpenhaus, J. Brimmers, F. Klocke, T. Bergs, Analysis of the influence
of the effective angles on the tool wear in gear hobbing, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 108 (2020) 2621–2632, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05499-0.
[25] E. Lee, B. Shaffer, The theory of plasticity applied to a problem of machining,
J. Appl. Mech. 18 (1951) 405–413, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4010357.
[26] M. Merchant, Mechanics of the metal cutting process. I. Orthogonal cutting and a
type 2 chip, J. Appl. Phys. 16 (1945) 267–275, https://doi.org/10.1063/
1.1707586.
[27] P. Gutmann, Zerspankraftberechnung Beim Wälzfräsen Dissertation, RWTH
Aachen University, 1988.
[28] F. Kühn, C. Löpenhaus, F. Klocke, Further development of a cutting force model for
gear hobbing, Adv. Mater. Res. (2016) 165–172.
[29] R. Wilcox, Introduction to Robust Estimation and Hypothesis Testing, third ed.,
Academic Press, Amsterdam, Boston, 2012.
[30] R. Rhinehart, Nonlinear Regression Modeling for Engineering Applications:
Modeling, Model Validation, and Enabling Design of Experiments, The American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, N.Y, 2016.
[31] S. Wellek, Testing Statistical Hypotheses of Equivalence and Noninferiority,
Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2010.
[32] K. Levenberg, A method for the solution of certain non-linear problems in least
squares, Q. Appl. Math. 2 (1944) 164–168.
[33] D.W. Marquardt, An algorithm for least-squares estimation of nonlinear
parameters, J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 11 (1963) 431–441.
[34] K. Popper, Conjectures and Refutations: the Growth of Scientific Knowledge,
Routledge, London, 2006.