ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 19881995 www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

Surface nish generated in hard turning of quenched alloy steel parts using conventional and wiper ceramic inserts
W. Grzesik, T. Wanat
Department of Manufacturing Engineering and Production Automation, Technical University of Opole, P.O. Box 321, 45-271 Opole, Poland Received 18 November 2005; received in revised form 3 January 2006; accepted 9 January 2006 Available online 20 March 2006

Abstract Signicant progress has already been achieved in green manufacturing including dry and hard, often high-speed, machining technologies. For instance, the demand for higher productivity has resulted in the wider application of ceramic and PCBN tools with special multi-radii (wiper) geometry. This paper reports some important characteristics of the surface roughness produced in the turning of a hardened low-chromium alloy steel using mixed aluminatitanium carbon (TiC) ceramic cutting tools equipped with both conventional and wiper inserts. The characteristic geometrical features of surfaces obtained in both these turning operations have been assessed by means of representative two-dimensional (2D) surface roughness parameters, and some 3D visualizations, which allowed more complete characterization of the surface topography and prediction of its service properties. Results show that keeping equivalent feed rates, i.e. 0.1 mm/rev for conventional and 0.2 mm/rev for wiper tools, the surfaces obtained have similar 3D height roughness parameters, and comparable values of skew and kurtosis. At dened cutting parameters, surfaces produced by wiper tools contain blunt peaks with distinctly smaller slopes resulting in better bearing properties. Only marginal changes of Ra parameter were recorded during 15 min machining trials. r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Hard turning; Mixed ceramic tool; Cutting tool geometry; Surface roughness

1. Introduction Hard machining (hard part machining) is now an accepted method for achieving increased product quality in such leading industrial branches as automotive, roller bearing, hydraulic and die and mold industry [1]. Gear wheels, bearing rings and other transmission parts are typical applications for hard turning, while high-speed hard milling is a leading technology in the die and mold industry [24]. Hard turning (HT) is a lathe machining process of steel workpieces with hardness higher than 60 HRC when cutting tool media are essentially ceramics and low- or high-content cubic boron nitride (CBN) [5,6]. Traditionally, the nal process on a hardened steel part is produced by grinding, but turning with ceramic or CBN tools can

Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 77 4006290; fax: +48 77 4006342.

E-mail address: grzesik@po.opole.pl (W. Grzesik). 0890-6955/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2006.01.009

often cut manufacturing costs, decrease production time (lead-times) and improve overall product quality [7,8]. Surface nish values of 0.1 mm Ra were recorded for CBN turning and milling [9,10]. The dimensional accuracy can reach IT5 when nishing by precision HT with a CNC machine equipped with high-precision motion control, high static and dynamic stiffness, and thermal stability systems [1]. As reported (Ref. [2,10,11]) tool wear and surface integrity can be a major drawback if hard turning is a viable replacement for grinding operations. Moreover, hard turning can cause surface microstructural alterations resulting in undesirable residual stress patterns and tempered white and dark layers with much more retained austenite than those produced in grinding [11,12]. It is revealed [13] that in nish turning of AISI 52100 bearing steel hardened to 6062 HRC, with alumina, titanium-carbide composite (70% Al2O3 and 30% TiC) tools, large tool nose radii give ner surface nish but leave deeper white layers. AluminaTiC ceramic cutting tools are well documented in other reports [14,15] to be an attractive

ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Grzesik, T. Wanat / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 19881995 1989

alternative to the grinding method basically due to good surface nish produced. Recently, Lima et al. [16] reported a very stable surface roughness of Ra between 0.3 and 0.5 mm for low feed rate of 0.05 mm/rev, three cutting speeds of 80, 150 and 220 m/ min, and more pronounced scatter at higher feed of 0.15 mm/rev, during 16 min turning tests using AISI D2 cold work tool steel (58 HRC) and mixed alumina inserts. However, drastic tool wear resulting in tool failure by spalling occurred for the combination of cutting speed of 220 m/min with feed rate of 0.15 mm/rev. It is shown [17] that for comparable values of the Rz parameter ground surfaces typically have a denser localization of irregularities resulting in higher values of the peak spacing parameter RSm and lower values of the average wavelength parameter (Rlq). In addition, they have higher values of the kurtosis and lower values of the skew. Moreover, hard turning with conventional ceramic tools produces bearing area curves with increased material ratios at depth 20%. Compared to grinding, hard turning can induce a relatively high compressive residual stress and improve the fatigue life of hard turned products [18]. Hard turning has now passed into its second phase of development due to the fact that many well-equipped machine shops perform computer numerical control (CNC) machining of both case- and through-hardened workpieces. Moreover, according to Sandvik Coromant [19] wiper-style inserts specially designed for HT with ceramics and CBN provide new levels of productivity. With these multi-radius type inserts ( Fig. 1b) the same surface nish can be maintained using double the conventional values of feed rates of 0.050.20 mm/rev. By analogy

to high-speed machining the new termhigh-feed machining is proposed for operations with wiper inserts [6]. In addition, the plunge hard turning, performed with special single-edged inserts as an orthogonal cut, can reduce machining time by as much as 90% [20]. This work deals with the two-dimensional (2D) and partly 3D characterization of surface nish when dry turning hardened low-chromium alloy steel using mixed ceramic tools with both conventional and wiper geometry. In particular, the aim of this study is to answer the fundamental question when the HT can be a real competitor to the grinding in terms of surface nish and induced exploitation properties.

2. Research approach and experimental procedure The main aim of the study was assessment of the surface nish produced during HT keeping different cutting conditions and comparison of some roughness parameters produced with both conventional and wiper tools. Turning tests were performed on a high rigidity lathe. Bars of a lowchromium alloy steel equivalent to AISI 5140 (DIN 41Cr4) hardened to 6071 HRC were used. They were 150 mm long with an external diameter of 75 mm. The cutting tool material was Sandvik CC650 mixed alumina (71% Al2O3, 28% TiC and 1% other). In general, sharp edges were used in each turning trial and all tests were repeated for three or four times. Roughly, the surfaces were produced during 30 s to 1 min. In the second part of experiments, the effect of tool nose wear (VBC wear indicator) on the changes of surface nish was determined. In this study, the effect of tool wear on the Ra parameter during turning test of 30 min long was exemplarily presented. The cutting conditions used during machining operations are specied in Table 1. The inserts conformed to the ISO code: (a) conventional SNGN 120408 T01020 (Fig. 1a) and the tool holder CSRNR 2525 M 12IC and (b) wiper CNGA120408 T01020 WG (Fig. 1b) and the tool holder DCLNR 2525 M 12-2. According to data provided by the manufacturer, the tool edge conguration between the rake and the clearance face consists of the chamfer of 0.1 mm width and a constant negative rake of 201, and the rounded part with the radius of about 25 mm. Combination of the insert and the tool holder resulted in 61 rake angle and 61 clearance angle. Cutting conditions were selected according to the recommendations provided by cutting tools manufacturers. In the turning test carried out the cutting speed was kept constant at 100 m/min. After each test, part surface nish was measured with a stylus prolograph. In addition, the 3D topographic maps of the machined surfaces were produced using scanning technique. A set of the 2D roughness parameters was determined by simple roughness measurements using a shop oor T1000E (Hommel Tester) instrument with a 5 mm diamond stylus radius. Moreover, 3D measurements were carried out on

Fig. 1. Comparison of inserts with conventional geometry (a) and wiper shape (b). Symbols: ffeed; apdepth of cut; reradius of the cutting edge; re1 and re2radii of wiper curvature; rboradius of smoothing part; Rzvalley-to-peak height.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
1990 W. Grzesik, T. Wanat / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 19881995 Table 3 Measured values of 2D surface roughness parameters for conventional tools Feed rate Ra (mm/rev) (mm) 0.04 0.07 0.10 0.20 0.28 0.40 0.24 0.37 0.53 1.50 2.89 5.47 Rz (mm) 1.62 1.85 2.50 7.39 12.80 21.89 Rt (mm) 1.8 2.0 2.4 7.8 13.4 22.3 RSm (mm) Rlq (mm) RDq (deg.) Rsk Rku Table 1 Specication of machining parameters used in the study Machining operation Conventional turning Inserts Machining parameters

SNGN 120408 T01020 f 0.040.4 mm/rev ap 0.25 mm vc 100 m/min re 0.8 mm bg 0.1 mm gn0 201 CNGA 120408 T01020 f 0.10.8 mm/rev WG re wiper ap 0.25 mm vc 100 m/min bg 0.1 mm gn0 201

Turning with wiper tools

22.29 12.86 9.69 73.95 25.96 7.36 105.00 40.90 6.60 197.60 147.75 5.42 271.37 201.05 7.40 390.90 296.06 9.53

0.43 1.82 1.19 0.86 0.99 0.97

2.33 2.82 2.49 2.53 2.34 2.35

3.1. Roughness height (amplitude) parameters In this section the changes of the two surface roughness parameters most frequently employed in industry, viz. Ra and Rz, are illustrated in Figs. 2 and 4, respectively. As shown in Fig. 2 after turning with conventional inserts when varying feed rate in the range of f 0.040.4 mm/rev the values of Ra parameter change from 0.24 to 5.47 mm, whereas corresponding values of Rz parameter (Fig. 4) range from 1.62 to 21.89 mm. The surfaces turned with Wiper inserts (when feed was selected at f 0.10.8 mm/ rev) were characterized by the measured values of Ra parameter ranging from 0.28 to 6.03 mm, and Rz values between 1.54 and 23.3 mm as shown in Figs. 2 and 4, respectively. It can be reasoned, based on the data gathered during the measurements that, typically, values of all height roughness parameters considered decrease when feed rate lowers. This is valid for a certain feed rate, after which the surface roughness becomes unacceptable. The feed rate corresponding to the minimum value of roughness depends on the corner radius. For the inserts with single radius corner the limiting feed rate is equal to f 0.04 mm/rev, but for wiper inserts its value increases to f 0.1 mm/rev. In Figs. 2 and 4 the characteristic values of Ra and Rz parameters, 0.320.63 mm for Ra and 24 mm for Rz, are marked. Fig. 3a presents the deterioration of surface roughness, corresponding to natural wear tests (Fig. 3b), recorded during 30 min for conventional and multi-radii ceramic inserts. It is evident that for wiper tools, only minor changes of the Ra parameter were observed up to 15 min. Equivalently, for this tool geometry the nose wear land VBC of 0.13 mm was measured, when the limiting value is usually set at 0.2 mm. On the other hand, for conventional inserts, relatively small changes of Ra parameter, near 10%, corresponding to the wear amount of about 0.1 mm, were observed only during rst 15 min of the turning test. The ratio of Rz parameters obtained for single- and multi-radius geometries increases with the increase in the feed rate. For instance, its average values was 1.46 for feed of 0.1 mm/rev and 6.3 when feed was elevated to 0.4 mm/ rev. It should be noted (Fig. 4) that the reproducing of CNGA 120408 T01020 WG type inserts results in the

Table 2 Specication of the roughness parameters used in the study [21,22] Category of roughness parameters Height Ra, Rz, Sa, Sz Spacing RSm, Rlq Angle RDq Prole height distribution Rsk, Rku, Ssk, Sku, Rmr(c)

the scanned area of 4 mm 4 mm by means of a TOPO 01P prolograph. In this investigation, part surface nish was assessed by means of a set of 2D surface roughness parameters divided into four subgroups (Table 2). It includes [21,22] the centre line average (Ra), the peak to valley height (Rz) within a sampling length (SL), the average peak spacing (RSm), the root mean square (RMS) average slope (RDq), the RMS average wavelength (Rlq), material ratio at depth c Rmr(c), skew (Rsk) and kurtosis (Rku) considered in ISO 4287 and ISO 13565-2 standards Surface Texture and some 3D (stereometric-S) equivalents, which allow to characterize the surface topography. Cut-off length was set to 0.8 mm (the evaluation length was equal to EL 4.8 mm) and 2.5 mm (EL 15 mm) according to ISO 4288 Surface Texture and an ISO 2CR lter was selected.

3. Experimental results The experimental investigations were performed in order to characterize the surface nish produced on steel bars hardened to about 60 HRC by turning with mixed ceramic tools and compare the effects of different tool nose shapes employed. In summary, the representative measured values of 2D roughness parameters are listed in Table 3 for conventional inserts and in Table 4 for wiper competitors.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Grzesik, T. Wanat / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 19881995 Table 4 Measured values of 2D surface roughness parameters for wiper tools Feed rate (mm/rev) 0.10 0.20 0.28 0.40 0.56 0.80 Ra (mm) 0.28 0.56 0.68 0.69 1.89 6.03 Rz (mm) 1.54 2.51 2.90 3.47 8.55 23.30 Rt (mm) 1.9 2.8 3.3 4.1 9.4 25.2 RSm (mm) 117.70 214.40 279.33 446.15 577.53 770.00 Rlq (mm) 58.51 115.94 118.18 264.91 328.74 590.45 RDq (deg.) 2.35 2.47 2.91 1.32 2.91 5.29 Rsk 0.62 1.44 1.55 1.03 1.02 0.92 Rku 2.09 2.48 2.53 2.22 2.43 2.23 1991

Fig. 2. Values of Ra parameter for turning with conventional (R) and wiper (W) tools.

Fig. 4. Values of Rz parameter for turning with conventional (R) and wiper (W) tools.

roughness height Rz falling below 4 mm when keeping a feed of 0.4 mm/rev. 3.2. Roughness spacing and shape parameters It is obviously known that spacing parameters are generally inuenced by feed rate. In order to assess the correlation between the feed and spacing parameters the line of proportionality was drawn in Figs. 5 and 6. It was revealed that the average peak spacing (RSm) and the RMS average wavelength (Rlq) decrease when applying lower feed rates. Their values change from RSm 22.29 to 390 mm and from Rlq 12.86 to 296 mm for operations with the single radius inserts, and from RSm 117.7 to 770 mm and from Rlq 58.5 to 590.45 mm for wiper ones, as illustrated in Figs. 5 and 6. In general, the values of RSm parameter are approximately equal to the appropriate feed rates (Fig. 5), whereas the values of Rlq change in such a way (Fig. 6) they are close to a half of the RSm spacing ones. The next parameter included in this group is the RMS prole slope RDq, which from denition provides the average angle of the irregularities along the SL. It was found that for surfaces generated by single rounded corners the RDq parameter changes from 5.51 to 101, and for wiper inserts it ranges between RDq 1.31 and 5.31 (Fig. 7). It is evident that the application of wiper ceramic inserts caused the prole slope expressed by RDq to decrease reasonably.

Fig. 3. Changes of the Ra parameter with time (a) and corresponding tool nose wear VBC (b).

ARTICLE IN PRESS
1992 W. Grzesik, T. Wanat / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 19881995

Fig. 5. Values of RSm parameter for turning with conventional (R) and wiper (W) tools.

Examples of the proles obtained at constant feed rate of 0.1 mm/rev, conforming the above-mentioned trend in changing the slope of irregularities, are shown in Fig. 8. As can be expected distinct differences in the surface prole shapes observed will result in corresponding bearing area curves (BACs) and further in their contact capabilities. Figs. 10 and 11 present the symmetrical curves of geometrical contact (SCGC) constructed as mirror images of relevant bearing curves [23], for conventional and wiper ceramic inserts used and two feed rates of 0.1 and 0.2 mm/ rev, respectively. The SCGC denes the lower (LB) and upper (UB) boundaries of working area (the width of this area is denoted by w) below and above the CL (centre line) as illustrated in Fig. 9. According to this innovation it can assist the constructor or the user in estimating the bearing and contact load capacity, the desired lubricant volume and the material volume predicted for removing by abrasive wear. As can be seen in Figs. 10 and 11 one can

Fig. 8. Characteristic shapes of the proles generated in turning with conventional (a) and wiper (b) tools for constant feed rate of 0.1 mm/rev. Vertical magnication7000 . Horizontal magnication200 . Fig. 6. Values of Rlq parameter for turning with conventional (R) and wiper (W) tools.

Fig. 7. Values of RDq parameter for turning with conventional (R) and wiper (W) tools.

Fig. 9. Characteristic dimensions of symmetric curve of geometrical contact [23].

ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Grzesik, T. Wanat / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 19881995 1993

Fig. 10. Symmetric curves of geometrical contact obtained for conventional (a) and wiper (b) tools (feed 0.1 mm/rev).

Fig. 11. Symmetric curves of geometrical contact obtained for conventional (a) and wiper (b) tools (feed 0.2 mm/rev).

control the width of the working area by selecting values of the feed rate and the tool nose geometry. For example, for the same feed of 0.1 mm/rev used in nishing hard turning tests the computed values of wc0.1 and ww0.1 for conventional and wiper tools are equal to:

 

wc0.1 2 mm for conventional tools, ww0.1 0.89 mm for wiper tools.

On the other hand, for feed of 0.2 mm/rev (Fig. 11) values of wc0.2 and ww0.2 are consequently increasing to 5.41 and 1.82 mm. Fig. 12 is a graph illustrating the relationship between the skew and kurtosis parameters, obtained for conventional and wiper tools and variable feed rate, listed in Tables 3 and 4. In this case the skew and kurtosis were calculated as the third and fourth momentum of the amplitude distribution function (ADF) as dened in ISO 4287 and in the book (Ref. [21]). The average values of skew about RskE0.5 and kurtosis about RkuE2.5 marked in Fig. 9, and degressiveprogressive shapes of the BACs mentioned indicate that hard

Fig. 12. Graph of 2D kurtosis vs. skew for a range of machined proles produced for different feeds. Rconventional tool, Wwiper tool.

surfaces turned with the minimum feed of 0.04 mm/rev possessed better bearing properties than those produced with higher feeds including wiper geometries (represented

ARTICLE IN PRESS
1994 W. Grzesik, T. Wanat / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 19881995

by squares). On the contrary, surface proles distinguished by more symmetrical ADF curves (a Gaussian surface correlates with RSk 3) are generated at higher feeds. The representative examples of 3D images of hardturned surfaces are visualized by means of both isometric views and contour maps. Characteristic sharp and partially blunt peaks localized by arrows are present in the scanned surfaces obtained for conventional (Fig. 13) and wiper (Fig. 14) tools, respectively. In general, the decrease of feed causes visible disturbances of the regular feed marks or ideal periodic roughness prole obtained under ideal geometrical reproduction of the tool [24]. In consequence, some characteristic surface structures can be distinguished, viz.: partially random (at lowest feed), periodic-anisotropic (Figs. 13 and 14) and mixed-anisotropic (at higher feeds).

4. Conclusions (i) Finish hard turning with wiper inserts provide comparable surface roughness to the effects obtained at lower feed rate during conventional operations. In this investigation this fact was documented when turning with conventional tools keeping 0.04 mm/rev feed and wiper tools using 0.1 mm/rev feed. For these cases the average values of roughness parameters are: Ra 0.28 mm and Rz 1.55 mm, and Ra 0.25 mm and Rz 1.62 mm, respectively. (ii) It was observed that the Ra parameter changes similarly for both inserts used during 30 min wear tests. Particularly, relatively small changes of Ra parameter, near 10%, corresponding to the nose wear VBC of about 0.1 mm, were recorded for conventional ceramic tool inserts during rst 15 min of the turning test. (iii) The application of wiper geometry does not practically inuence the spacing roughness parameters. Especially, the proportionality between RSm parameter and feed rate was determined. On the other hand, wiper tools with smoothing edges generate peaks with substantially lower RMS prole slopes (RDq). As a result blunt peaks in the 2D surface proles recorded and 3D isometric views are observed. (iv) Comparable bearing curves were revealed for conventional tools and wiper tools working with double feed rate, as e.g. for feeds equal to 0.1 and 0.2 mm/rev in this study. It should also be noted that surfaces generated with lower feeds have better bearing properties due to lower values of skew. (v) 3D visualization conrmed some characteristic features of surfaces produced with both tools tested, i.e. sharp and blunt peaks. In particular, contour maps allow three characteristic surface structures to be classied (partially random, periodic-anisotropic and mixed-anisotropic) with different distortion levels in comparison to an ideal reproduction of the cutting tool.

Fig. 13. Typical 3D topography for turning with conventional tool and feed rate f 0.1 mm/rev. Surface structure: periodic-anisotropic.

References
[1] J.M. Zou, M. Anderson, J.E. Stahl, Identication of cutting errors in precision hard turning process, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 153-154 (2004) 746750. [2] J. Rech, A. Moisan, Surface integrity in nish hard turning of casehardened steels, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 43 (2003) 543550. [3] J. Destefani, Technology key to moldmaking success, Manufacturing Engineering 133 (4) (2004) 5964. [4] M.A. Elbestawi, L. Chen, C.E. Becze, T.I. El-Wardany, High-speed milling of dies and molds in their hardened state, Annals of CIRP 46 (1) (1997) 5762. [5] H.K. Tonshoff, C. Arendt, R. Ben Amor, Cutting of hardened steel, Annals of CIRP 49 (2) (2000) 547566. [6] Sandvik Coromant, New developments in hard part machining, www.SandvikCoromant.com, 2002.

Fig. 14. Typical 3D topography for turning with wiper tool and feed rate f 0.2 mm/rev. Surface structure: periodic-anisotropic.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
W. Grzesik, T. Wanat / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 19881995 [7] W. Konig, M. Klinger, R. Link, Machining hard materials with geometrically dened cutting edges-eld of applications and limitations, Annals of CIRP 39 (1) (1990) 6164. [8] W. Konig, A. Berktold, K.F. Koch, Turning versus grinding-a comparison of surface integrity aspects and attainable accuracies, Annals of CIRP 42 (1) (1993) 3943. [9] Y.K. Chou, C.J. Evans, M.M. Barash, Experimental investigation of CBN turning of hardened AISI 52100 steel, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 124 (2002) 274283. [10] G. Byrne, D. Dornfeld, B. Denkena, Advancing cutting technology, Annals of CIRP 52 (2) (2003) 483507. [11] F. Klocke, E. Brinskmeier, K. Weinert, Capability prole of hard cutting and grinding processes, Annals of CIRP 54 (2) (2005). [12] Y.B. Guo, J. Sahni, A comparative study of hard turned and cylindrically ground white layers, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 135145. [13] Y.K. Chou, H. Song, Tool nose radius effects on nish hard turning, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 148 (2004) 259268. [14] G.C. Benga, A.M. Abrao, Turning of hardened 100Cr6 bearing steel with ceramic and PCBN cutting tools, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 143-144 (2003) 237244. [15] A.S.A. Kumar, R. Durai, T. Sornakumar, Machinability of hardened steel using alumina based ceramic cutting tools, International Journal of Refractory Metals and Hard Materials 21 (2003) 109117. 1995 [16] J.G. Lima, R.F. Avila, A.M. Abrao, M. faustino, J.P. Davim, Hard turning: AISI 4340 high strength low alloy steel and AISI D2 cold work tool steel, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 169 (2005) 388395. [17] W. Grzesik, T. Wanat, Comparative assessment of surface roughness produced by hard machining with mixed ceramic tools including 2D and 3D analysis, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 164165 (2005) 12041211. [18] Y.B. Guo, D.W. Yen, Hard turning versus grinding-the effect of process-induced residual stress on rolling contact, Wear 256 (2004) 393399. [19] Sandvik Coromant, Wiper Tools. Turning Productivity, www.SandvikCoromant.com, 2001. [20] D. Huddle, Plunge turning can be a cost-effective grinding alternative, Manufacturing Engineering 128 (4) (2002) 7681. [21] W. Grzesik, S. Brol, Hybrid approach to surface roughness evaluation in multistage machining processes, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 134 (2003) 265272. [22] B. Grifths, Manufacturing Surface Technology, Penton Press, London, 2001. [23] J. Kaczmarek, E. Kulawik, New approach to the characteristics of surface microstereometry on the basis of facing, Advanced Technology Machining Equipment 23 (4) (1999) 5570. [24] G. Boothroyd, W.A. Knight, Fundamentals of Machining and Machine Tools, Marcel Dekker, New York and Basel, 1989.