The Performance of Diamond-Like Carbon Coated Drills in Thermally Assisted Drilling of Ti-6Al-4V
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drilling performances of diamond-like carbon coatings incorporating W (W-DLC) deposited on high-speed steel tools were evaluated when drilling Ti-6Al-4V at 25 °C and under thermally assisted machining (TAM) conditions at 400 °C. Dry drilling using W-DLC coated drills caused immediate tool failure as a result of titanium adhesion. The tool lives improved for TAM drilling using W-DLC when the Ti-6Al-4V was placed (with dry surface) in a cooling bath at −80 °C and resulted in low and uniform drilling torques as well as good surface finish. The low coefficient of friction (COF) of W-DLC against Ti-6Al-4V observed under TAM conditions was attributed to the formation of W oxide layers at the tool surface, as determined by Raman spectroscopy. Introducing a cooling bath was necessary in order to restrict the temperature rise in the workpiece that caused rapid tool wear above 500 °C during drilling operations and also to prevent adhesion with minimal built-up edge (BUE) formation during drilling. The TAM performance of W-DLC coated drills was shown to be similar to that of WC-Co drills used in conventional flooded drilling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".