The Effect of Rake Angle and Cutting Edge Radius on the Orthogonal Cutting Process of Ti6Al4V Alloy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the effect of rake angle, α, cutting edge radius, r, and feed rate, f, on the cutting force and cutting zone temperature during orthogonal dry cutting of Ti6Al4V. A numerical model representative of the 2D orthogonal cutting process is developed using ABAQUS/Explicit software. Johnson-Cook, (JC) constitutive material model is used to describe material plasticity. JC damage model and energy-based fracture criterion are used to describe damage initiation and evolution. Using Minitab-19 software, Taguchi L9 orthogonal array (3 × 3) is implemented to plan simulation trails. Assuming a constant cutting speed of 500 mm/min, three levels for each factor are considered α (-5°, 0°, 5°), r (0.02, 0.04, 0.06 mm) and f (0.1, 0.2, 0.3 mm). The cutting force and cutting zone temperature are analyzed using ANOVA. Based on a 90% Confidence Interval (90% CI), the results show that only feed rate significantly affects the cutting force. However, rake angle, cutting edge radius, and feed rate do not substantially affect cutting zone temperature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".