Next Article in Journal
The Use of Triboemission Imaging and Charge Measurements to Study DLC Coating Failure
Next Article in Special Issue
Hybrid Ti-MoS2 Coatings for Dry Machining of Aluminium Alloys
Previous Article in Journal
Characteristics of RF-Sputtered Thin Films of Calcium Phosphate on Titanium Dental Implants
Previous Article in Special Issue
Machining Duplex Stainless Steel: Comparative Study Regarding End Mill Coated Tools
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Coatings
Volume 7
Issue 8
10.3390/coatings7080127
coatings-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Investigation of Coated Cutting Tool Performance during Machining of Super Duplex Stainless Steels through 3D Wear Evaluations

by
Yassmin Seid Ahmed
1,*,
Jose Mario Paiva
1,2,
Danielle Covelli
3 and
Stephen Clarence Veldhuis
1
1
McMaster Manufacturing Research Institute (MMRI), Department of Mechanical Engineering, McMaster University, 1280 Main StreetWest, Hamilton, ON L8S4L7, Canada
2
Department of Mechanical and Materials Science, Catholic University of Santa Catarina, Rua Visconde de Taunay, 427-Centro, Joinville-SC 89203-005, Brazil
3
Biointerfaces Institute, McMaster University, ETB 422, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 0A3, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Coatings 2017, 7(8), 127; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings7080127
Submission received: 17 July 2017 / Revised: 7 August 2017 / Accepted: 14 August 2017 / Published: 17 August 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Coatings for Cutting Tools)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In this study, the wear mechanisms and tribological performance of uncoated and coated carbide tools were investigated during the turning of super duplex stainless steel (SDSS)—Grade UNS S32750, known commercially as SAF 2507. The tool wear was evaluated throughout the cutting tests and the wear mechanisms were investigated using an Alicona Infinite Focus microscope and a scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS). Tribo-film formation on the worn rake surface of the tool was analyzed using X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS). In addition, tribological performance was evaluated by studying chip characteristics such as thickness, compression ratio, shear angle, and undersurface morphology. Finally, surface integrity of the machined surface was investigated using the Alicona microscope to measure surface roughness and SEM to reveal the surface distortions created during the cutting process, combined with cutting force analyses. The results obtained showed that the predominant wear mechanisms are adhesion and chipping for all tools investigated and that the AlTiN coating system exhibited better performance in all aspects when compared with CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated cutting insert and uncoated carbide insert; in particular, built-up edge formation was significantly reduced.

1. Introduction

Super duplex stainless steel (SDSS) is a specific type of stainless steel alloys that has a biphasic microstructure, consisting of approximately 50% ferrite and 50% austenite by volume. SDSS has a favorable combination of chromium, nickel and molybdenum [1], which provides an attractive combination of mechanical and corrosion properties and is thus widely applied in aggressive corrosion environments such as gas and oil, petrochemical and chemical, industries. These materials are considered difficult to machine because they have low thermal conductivity combined with high tensile strength and high shear strength and during machining they show a high tendency toward work-hardening [2,3,4]. These characteristics make SDSS more difficult to machine than standard austenitic stainless steels [5].
Adhesion (attrition), diffusion, abrasion and oxidation are the main wear mechanisms taking place during machining of stainless steels which are strongly associated with the temperature in the cutting zone [6]. Another point found during machining of these alloys is the work hardening tendency. The work hardening of SDSS increases the friction forces during contact between the work piece and cutting tool edge, which increases the temperature, causing oxidation [7]. In addition, the high ductility of the stainless steel leads to the formation of long continuous chips and the intensive sticking of the workpiece material to the cutting tool surface, which results in an adhesive wear enhancement [8]. These conditions promote built-up edge (BUE) formation and tearing off during cutting, which results in cutting edge chipping and cutting forces instability. This response to the machining process results in severe surface damage to the machined part and chipping of the tool cutting edge [9]. Therefore, the selection of the cutting tool is very important to increase tool life, improve surface finish and reduce the cutting forces. Several papers have suggested the application of PVD coatings on the cutting tools as a way to reduce friction conditions during the cutting process by reducing heat generation [10]. For applications where the cutting process is characterized by high temperatures in the cutting zone, for instance, in machining of materials with low thermal conductivity, the use of cemented carbide tools coated with self-adaptive PVD coatings is strongly recommended. During machining, these coatings form protective, nano-scale tribo-films on the tool rake surface, which reduce friction and result in a reduction of the degree of BUE formation, leading to wear performance improvement [11].
Many researchers have studied the wear mechanisms associated with the machining of different types of stainless steels using CVD and PVD coated tools; however, there are few researchers who study in detail the wear mechanisms associated with machining SDSS. Corrêa et al. studied the machinability of two stainless steels, martensitic S41000 and super martensitic S41426, during turning with CVD TiC–TiCN–TiN coated tools. The authors found that abrasion and diffusion were the main wear mechanisms during machining of martensitic stainless steel, while for the super martensitic stainless steel, attrition and abrasion were dominant [6]. Krolczyk et al. [12] studied surface roughness and wear mechanisms through machining of duplex stainless steel (AISI S31803) with Ti(C/N)/Al2O3/TiN coated tools. The authors determined that the main wear mechanism was abrasion. Selvaraj et al. [13] also investigated machining of two types of duplex stainless steel and found that the wear mechanisms changed depending on the cutting speed. At low cutting speed, the main wear mechanism was abrasion, while diffusion and oxidation wear were predominant at high cutting speed. Carlos et al. [14] performed turning experiments with a super duplex stainless steel alloy (S32750) using a PVD multi-coated (TiAlN and TiN layers) cemented carbide tools. The authors noted that notch wear at the end of depth of cut was the responsible for the end of tool life and that a large amount of the material adhered to the tool wear area. Jawaid et al. [15] used CVD Ti(C/N)/TiC/Al2O3 and PVD TiN coated inserts. The authors reported that attrition was the principal wear mechanism at lower speed conditions, while abrasion and diffusion wear mechanisms were the failure modes at higher speed conditions. They also found that CVD coated inserts exhibited the worst performance, owing to the greater effects of thermo-mechanical loads, coarse grain size, and higher Co-content (18% Co) of the carbide substrate. In contrast, the PVD coated insert gave better performance because of the thermal stability of the alumina coating.
The main goal of this paper is to compare the tool life, wear mechanisms and tribological performance of coated (PVD AlTiN, CVD TiCN + Al2O3) and uncoated cemented carbide inserts in the turning of super duplex stainless steel—Grade UNS S32750. The performance of these cutting tools will be evaluated in terms of tool life, chip formation, surface integrity and cutting forces. The novelty in this research is 3D wear evaluations of different coated and uncoated tools supported by Alicona Microscope, SEM, EDS and XPS analyses. This research will increase understanding of the main reasons for different wear mechanisms acting during turning of SDSS and thus to summarize some suggestions to increase tool life for industry, particularly in the oil and gas sector.

2. Experimental Procedures

2.1. Workpiece Material

In this work, cylindrical tubes of super duplex stainless steel—UNS S32750 were investigated during turning (roughing operations). The chemical composition and mechanical properties of the material are shown in Table 1. To reveal the workpiece microstructure, samples of the super duplex stainless steel were prepared, polished and etched with Beraha’s solution (100 mL H2O + 20 mL hydrochloric acid (HCl) + 0.3–0.6 g of potassium metabisulfite). The microstructure of the SDSS workpiece generated during the cutting process was characterized using a Nikon ECLIPSE LV 100 microscope (Nikon Canada Inc., Mississauga, ON, Canada) equipped with UC30 camera. The microstructure and phase distribution of the material were analyzed using NIS Elements imaging software. Images of the microstructure of the workpiece were captured from five different areas and the percentage averages of austenite and ferrite phases were calculated using the NIS imaging software (version 4.0, Nikon Canada Inc., Mississauga, ON, Canada). This microstructure and average results are presented in Figure 1.

2.2. Cutting Tools Characteristic and Cutting Fluid

Cemented carbide inserts coated with PVD AlTiN and CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coatings were compared during cutting tests to determine the tool life. The cemented carbide is WC 6%Co and the ISO code for the cutting inserts is CNMG432-SM with the following geometry characteristics: Back rake angle, λ0 = 9°; clearance angle, α0 = 5°; wedge angle, β = 76°; edge radius, r = 24 µm and nose radius, Rε = 0.8 mm. The inserts were manufactured by Sandvik and the tool-holder was an ISO PCLNL 45165 12HP, supplied by Kennametal. X-ray stress analysis was carried out on new coated tools according to the sin² Ѱ method to measure the residual stresses on the surface of the tools. The parameters used for residual stress analysis by X-ray diffraction were as follows: Bragg angle = 118.2°, Wave length = Co-Ka2, Passion ratio = 0.250, S1 = −7 × 10−7 and ½ S2 = 3.5 × 10−6. The coating characteristics are shown in Table 2. The machining experiments were carried out on an OKUMA CNC Crown L1060 lathe (OKUMA, Charlotte, NC, USA) with 15 kW of power and an OKUMA OSP-U10L controller. The turning tests were conducted for roughing operations with a cutting speed of 120 m/min, feed rate of 0.3 mm/rev, and depth of cut of 1 mm, under wet conditions. The cutting fluid was applied at a flow rate of 11 L/min via a nozzle positioned directly above the cutting tool and directed toward the tool tip. The cutting fluid chosen was semi-synthetic coolant-CommCool™ 8800, manufactured by the Wallover Company (Harrow, ON, Canada), at a concentration of 7%, typically used with stainless steel alloys.

2.3. Experimental Machine Techniques

During the machining tests, the cutting force measurements were performed with a 3D component tool holder Kistler dynamometer type 9121 with a data acquisition system. The signals of the forces from the dynamometer were transmitted to a Kistler 5010 type amplifier (Kistler Instrument Corp., Amherst, NY, USA) and then recorded on a computer using LABVIEW software (version 14.0, National Instruments, Austin, TX, USA). The acquisition rate was 300 data points per second, scale was 20 MU/volt and sensitivity was 3.85 mV/MU.
The tool flank wear was measured using a KEYENCE—VHX 5000 digital microscope (Keyence Corp., Osaka, Japan), equipped with a CCD camera and image analyzer software. The tool life criterion was set to a flank wear of 0.3 mm according to the recommendation of the ISO 3685 Standard [18]. After the tests, the cutting tools were analyzed by SEM (Vega 3-TESCAN, Brno, Czech Republic), coupled to EDS. The new and worn inserts were also analyzed using an Alicona Infinite Focus G5 microscope (Alicona Manufacturing Inc., Bartlett, IL, USA), which works by focus variation, to generate real 3D surface images. This microscope allows for the capture of images with a lateral resolution down to 400 nm and a vertical resolution down to 10 nm. In order to measure the total wear volume and BUE volume of a cutting edge, first a 3D model of a new edge of the original insert was measured and then the edge was measured a second time after cutting (0.3 mm flank wear). The software used the 3D image of the new edge as a reference and compared it with a 3D image of a worn edge. Following these measurements, all inserts were etched using hydrochloric acid (HCl) solution to remove all adhered material on the cutting tool to reveal the wear mechanisms.
The chip compression ratio, the shear angle and the friction coefficient at the tool-chip interface were determined according to standard procedures [19]. After the cutting test, the machined workpiece was investigated using SEM to reveal the surface distortion created during the cutting. In addition, the surface roughness of the machined workpiece was evaluated by means of an Alicona Infinite Focus-with the Profile roughness module. The procedures of surface roughness measurements were performed according to EN ISO standard 25178 [20]. Roughness measurements were taken with a cut-off wave length of 800 μm, a vertical resolution of 100 nm and a lateral resolution of 2 µm. The surface roughness used in this study is the arithmetic mean surface roughness value (Ra), which is generally used in the industry. This evaluation was conducted three times and average reading was considered.
The structural and phase transformation at the cutting tool/workpiece interface, as well as the chemical nature of the tribo-films formed were determined by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) on a Physical Electronics (PHI) Quantera II (Physical Electronics Inc., Chanhassen, MN, USA). The XPS spectrometer was equipped with a hemispherical energy analyzer and an Al anode source for X-ray generation and a quartz crystal monochromator for focusing the generated X-rays. A monochromatic Al Kα X-ray (1486.7 eV) source was operated at 50W–15 kV. The system base pressure was as low as 1.33 × 10−7 Pa with an operating pressure that did not exceed 2.66 × 10−6 Pa. Before any spectra were collected, the samples were sputter-cleaned for 4 min using a 4-kVAr+ beam. A 200-μm beam was used for all data collected on the samples. A pass energy of 280 eV was used to obtain all survey spectra, while a pass energy of 69 eV was used to collect all high resolution data. All spectra were obtained at a 45° take off angle. A dual beam charge compensation system was also utilized to ensure neutralization of all samples. The instrument was calibrated using a freshly cleaned Ag reference foil, where the Ag 3d5/2 peak was set to 368 eV. All data analysis was performed using PHI Multipak version 9.4.0.7 software [7]. X-ray stress analysis was performed using X-ray diffraction on new coated tools to measure residual stresses on the surface of the tool, see Table 2.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Tool Life Measurements

Figure 2 shows the plot of flank wear versus cutting length for the uncoated and coated cutting inserts tested during machining of SDSS. A significant improvement during machining in terms of tool life was obtained when machining with a cutting insert coated with PVD AlTiN. The results show that the PVD AlTiN coated cutting insert has a cutting length almost two times greater than the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated cutting insert. The PVD AlTiN coating shows the ability to improve the friction conditions at the cutting interface, which leads to the rapid flow of the chip on the rake surface, as can be seen on the chip undersurface obtained with PVD AlTiN coating (Figure 3d). This behavior occurs due to the ability that AlTiN coating has to adapt to external stimuli, i.e., to self-organize. During the cutting process, a part of the cutting energy is consumed by self-organization of the coating layer to form a thermal barrier/lubricating tribo-film [21,22], which reduces the friction in the cutting zone and results in better tool life. The tool life obtained by CVD coated cutting inserts is shorter due to the intense friction conditions experienced in the cutting zone.

3.2. Chip Characteristics

Following machining, chip types and morphology were determined for each cutting tool. Figure 3 shows SEM images of the chips for the uncoated and coated tools; the chips have similar curling for both coatings. However, the chip undersurface morphology is better for the PVD AlTiN cutting insert. The high friction conditions at the chip-tool interface reduce the chip speeds during the chip flow, increasing the area of contact between tool and chip on the rake face surface and, therefore, contributing increased temperature in the cutting zone. High temperature due to high friction at the cutting zone results in reduced tool life for TiCN + Al2O3 coated inserts.
Usually, the type of chip and undersurface morphology are direct indicators of frictional conditions at the tool-chip interface [19]. In this case, it is evident from chip characteristic studies that the friction conditions in the cutting zone (tool-chip interface) were more favourable for the AlTiN coating. The measured values of chip thickness and calculated values of the chip compression ratio, shear angle, and coefficient of friction are tabulated in Table 3. The chip thickness, chip compression ratio and shear angle are better for the AlTiN coated tool compared to CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated and uncoated tools (Table 3). These characteristics confirm the AlTiN coated tool has lower friction between the chip and tool, leading to lower wear of the cutting tool.
A possible explanation of the observed improvement on the metal flow in the case of the AlTiN coated insert versus the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated and uncoated tools is the formation of tribo-films on the rake surface during friction [23]. Smoother morphology of the chips (Figure 3d) during machining of SDSS using cutting tools with the AlTiN coated tool corresponds to better thermo-frictional conditions during cutting. In this case, a beneficial heat flow redistribution is taking place: The majority of the heat generated during cutting goes into the chips and dissipates with chip removal [24]. The tribo-films generated on the surface of PVD coated tool can change the wear behavior substantially: They provide surface protection, some lubricity and improve frictional and wear performance, resulting in very beneficial heat flow redistribution at the tool-chip interface. The presence of these tribofilms was confirmed by XPS investigation. This analysis was performed on the cutting tool (Rake face). Figure 4a shows the location selected for XPS studies.

3.3. The Composition of Tribo Films and Frictional Conditions

Figure 4b–d shows respectively the XPS Ti2p, Al2s and O1s spectra obtained from the rake surface of AlTiN coated cutting tool. The rake face was chosen for the analysis because of the elevated temperatures typically caused by tool-chip contact on this surface. The presence of Al2O3 shows that a partial chemical transformation of aluminum, in the AlTiN coating, takes place during cutting (Figure 4c). The spectra also indicate the formation of an amorphous-like structure of the alumina-based tribo-films [25,26]. Titanium in the AlTiN coating (Figure 4b,d) forms non-stoichiometric titanium tribo-oxide and rutile TiO2 (peaks 530.4, 457.4 and 463.8 eV). The formation of these tribo-films with high chemical stability reduces the adherence of the workpiece material to the cutting tool surface (Figure 5).
In this way, the reduction of adhered material on the rake surface results in constant material flow, which leads to lower heat generation at the tool/workpiece interface. Due to the improved lubricity of this oxide under elevated cutting temperatures [27], the characteristics of the chips formed change critically (Figure 3) and the chip flow along the chip undersurface is also improved, which improves the chip compression ratio (Table 3). These phenomena serve to enhance the adaptability of the coatings, which thus results in a better tool life (Figure 2). For this reason, formation of these nano-scale tribofilms is very beneficial on the surface of PVD coating in contrast to the microns thick alumina layer on the CVD coated tools.
To understand further why the PVD AlTiN coated tool has a better performance than CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated tool, the residual stresses of new PVD AlTiN and CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated tools were measured and listed in Table 2. It was found that the tensile residual stress in CVD TiCN + Al2O3 is much higher (439 MPa) as compared to PVD AlTiN coated insert (293 MPa). The reason for that is the CVD coating process occurs under much higher temperature typically ranging from 200–1600 °C compared to lower than 500 °C in case of the PVD AlTiN coating [28]. High tensile residual stress in CVD coating induces internal stresses, which increase thermal loads and reduce thermal stability.

3.4. Tool Wear Analysis

As discussed previously, the main focus of this research is to compare different wear mechanisms of coated and uncoated inserts. For this reason, real 3D images of the worn tools were studied by means of an Alicona microscope, see Figure 5a. All the tools showed intense chipping, adhesion and flank wear during machining tests, which results in reduced tool life. The main reason for these behaviors is the instability in the chip formation temperature, combined with strong adhesion at the tool-chip interface resulting in high compressive stress; these phenomena are associated with low thermal conductivity of SDSS, which leads to high cutting temperature and accelerates the wear formation.
The presence of test material adhered onto the tools was observed in all tests. In order to analyze the wear mechanisms, it was necessary to remove the adhered layers of the cutting tools through chemical attack with HCl, see Figure 5b. It can be seen that there is no BUE on the surface of the tools, which means that all the adhered material was removed, allowing differentiation between wear mechanisms acting on the tools.
Each tools studied, total wear volume and the volume of BUE before and after etching were measured using the Alicona microscope. These results are presented in Figure 6. It is noted that the PVD AlTiN coated insert has the lowest total wear and BUE volume compared with the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated and uncoated inserts, indicating that AlTiN coating exhibits good performance during machining of SDSS. This conclusion agrees with the results obtained from the XPS studies (Figure 4), where it is observed that the AlTiN coating has the capacity to adapt to external stimuli, i.e., to self-organize. In this way, the tribo-film formation can enhance the process of cutting, which provides benefits such as reducing the friction conditions in the cutting zone, which leads to smoother chip undersurface (Figure 3d), reduction in BUE formation and increase in tool life (Figure 2) [11].
Different wear mechanisms commonly associated with machining of SDSS were observed during the wear tests, flank wear and chipping being the most significant modes. Also, material adhesion was observed in all cutting tools. As was explained in the previous paragraph, adhesive wear is the main wear mechanism during machining of stainless steels. However, after etching and at high magnifications, different wear mechanisms were observed. In the following paragraphs the different modes of wear are discussed, and associated EDS analysis are summarized in Table 4.
Figure 7 shows in detail the wear mechanisms of the PVD AlTiN coated insert. Figure 7a shows the tool before etching where the presence of adhered workpiece material was confirmed by EDS 1 (high percentage of Fe and Cr). Figure 7b–e show the same tool after etching, where there is no adhered material on the tool, see EDS 2. Figure 7a shows areas with a rough aspect on the cutting edge, which are characteristic of the adhesive (or attrition) wear mechanism [29]. This mechanism frequently occurs when there is chemical affinity between the tool and the workpiece material, and adhesion leads to the formation of BUE at the coated tool-chip interface. Another relevant phenomenon, which can be related to the tribological system behavior is the high tool-chip interface temperature: machining at a speed of 120 m/min generates high temperatures at the tool-chip interface that can generate adhesion on the tool rake and flank face as evidenced by plastic flow of the workpiece material (stick-slip, followed by plucking action). Similar results were reported by Corrêa et al. [6] and Junior et al. [30]. Figure 7c shows a high magnification of tool-adhered layer interface where a large crack is observed running perpendicular to the flank face. This crack could have been caused by one or a combination of the following wear mechanisms [31]: Diffusion, adhesion, abrasion and oxidation. These wear mechanisms lead to a continual loss or dislocation of material. Also, BUE formation can lead to mass loss or mass dislocation as it grows throughout the cutting process and periodically breaks off, creating cracks on the tool surface and break-out the cutting edge [11]. Figure 7d shows intensive chipping developed on the cutting edge, which indicates that mechanical fatigue caused by BUE formation caused damage to the cutting tool [32]. Above the cutting edge in Figure 7e, there is a smooth surface, which is associated with diffusion wear. Diffusion wear is a mechanism that involves transport of the atoms from high concentration (cutting tool) to low concentration (chip) [19], which depends mainly on the cutting temperature, contact time and the solubility of the elements in the secondary shear zone [33]. This process takes place in a very narrow area at the interface between the cutting tool and chip and causes a weakening of the cutting tool.
Figure 8 shows the wear mechanisms of the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated insert. Figure 8a shows the insert before etching and Figure 8b–f show the insert after etching, see EDS 3 and 4 in Table 4. Figure 8c shows the rake face of the tool where the coating was removed from the cutting tool. EDS 5 and 6 results identify two strips of the coating (EDS 4) on the substrate of the tool (EDS 5). The coating was exposed along the cutting edge, and severe chipping and micro-chipping developed (see Figure 8d). These mechanisms confirm the previous results obtained by X-ray stress analysis (Table 2). Due to high coating temperature, internal stress is induced, increases thermal loads and reduces thermal stability, leading to intensive chipping on the cutting edge. Figure 8e shows a very smooth surface, which is clearly seen at high magnification, suggesting that a diffusion wear mechanism prevailed on the rake face [31]. Figure 8f shows parallel lines in the direction of sliding action, which indicate abrasive wear. The ASTM International tool wear standard explains that abrasive wear occurs as a result of hard particles forced against and moved along a solid surface [34], which is in this case BUE fragments. Selvaraj et al. [13] explained that abrasion wear mechanism is caused by grains broken off during the turning process, which become restricted between the chip and the tool, creating scratches on the flank face of the tool. The same explanation was also suggested by Krolczyk et al. [11] and Jawaid et al. [15].
Figure 9 shows the different wear mechanisms on the surface of the uncoated insert before and after etching. Figure 9a shows the flank face of the tool after chemical etching, where a view of the regular flank wear is shown. Figure 9b shows the tool before etching where a large BUE is seen on the tool as indicated in EDS 6. After etching (Figure 9c), all the adhered material was removed revealing that severe chipping has occurred on the cutting edge.
In summary, after the turning of SDSS with different cutting tools, it is possible to see that, due to low machinability of SDSS, the tools are easily affected, leading to excessive tool wear during machining operations. To ensure good results with SDSS, it is necessary to understand how the cutting tool behaves during cutting. Under the cutting conditions tested, the cutting tools showed wear from various mechanisms: Adhesion, abrasion and diffusion. It is important for industry to understand the main reasons for these mechanisms in order to reduce their effect on tool life. A summary of the main causes of wear observed during cutting SDSS through this research and suggested solutions is given in Table 5.

3.5. Machined Workpiece Characteristics

Surface integrity plays an important role in many areas and has a great importance in the evaluation of machining accuracy. Many factors affect the surface conditions of machined parts, one of them being the cutting tool, which has a significant influence on the surface roughness. Stainless steel is a material generally used for applications requiring the greatest reliability, and therefore, and any damage to the subsurface layers must be controlled [36].
For this reason, small pieces of the machined workpiece were cut off to be analyzed using the SEM to reveal the surface distortions created during the cutting process and Alicona microscope to measure the surface roughness. Figure 10 shows three-dimensional and SEM images of the machined workpiece along with cutting force data collected at the beginning of the turning process and the values of surface roughness measured after the cutting tests. In Figure 10a,b, the machined surfaces obtained with uncoated and CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated inserts show cracks and distortions. It can be seen that minor cracks were found and bad surface finish with low distortion was accomplished. As a result of intensive BUE formed on the uncoated insert (Figure 5a) and high friction generated during cutting, some of the chips welded onto the surface of the workpiece (227 µm). Zhou et al. [37] and Alabdullah et al. [38] observed the same phenomenon during machining of difficult-to- cut materials.
Chip sticking on the machined workpiece is consistent with the high cutting forces measured during cutting. In addition, there is a high variation of the values of cutting forces for the uncoated insert (Figure 10a), which indicates that high frictions conditions in the cutting zone were generated during the cutting process with the uncoated insert. This phenomenon is strongly diminished for the coated tools: The variations of cutting forces are smaller, surface roughness is lower and there is no chip sticking on the machined surfaces (Figure 10b,c), which is a significant improvement.

4. Conclusions

The tool life results, analysis of wear mechanisms and tribological performance of different coated and uncoated tools during the turning of SDSS allowed the following conclusions to be drawn:
  • Substantial improvement in tool life was achieved with the AlTiN coated insert: Tool life was approximately twice that of the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated insert and three times than uncoated insert.
  • The chip thickness, chip compression ratio and shear angle values are better for the AlTiN coated tool, compared to the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated and uncoated tools, and the chip undersurface is smoother without any defects, indicating lower friction between the chip and tool rake face, which results in a constant chip flow over the tool rake surface.
  • XPS analysis revealed that the underlying cause of the high performance of the AlTiN coating is the formation of aluminum oxide tribo-films at the tool-chip interface.
  • The AlTiN coated tool had the lowest value for both BUE and total wear volume compared with the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated and uncoated tools, indicating that PVD AlTiN coated tool performs very well with SDSS.
  • Adhesion wear and chipping are the predominant wear mechanism for all the cutting tools studied. When turning with the PVD AlTiN coated tool, adhesion and diffusion were present in different places on the worn area of the tools. Machining with the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated tool shows diffusion, abrasion, chipping and adhesion wear mechanisms while sever adhesion wear and chipping were the main wear mechanism with the uncoated insert.
  • The machined surface obtained using the AlTiN coated tool had the lowest surface roughness value. The machined surfaces obtained with the CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated and uncoated inserts show minor cracks and distortions, and there is some chip sticking on the machined workpiece obtained by the uncoated insert, as a result of intensive BUE formation and high friction generated during cutting. Spikes in cutting forces at the beginning of the cutting process were highest for the uncoated cutting tool, which is directly related to chip sticking on the surface of the workpiece.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge the financial supported from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada’s (NSERC) Strategic Canadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology (CANRIMT).

Author Contributions

Yassmin Seid Ahmed performed the cutting experiments, performed metallographic, SEM, XRD and Alicona studies, and wrote the paper, Jose Mario Paiva planned experimental procedure, Danielle Covelli performed XPS studies, and Stephen Clarence Veldhuis is the supervisor of the research team. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bordinassi, E.C.; Stipkovic, M.F.; Batalha, G.F.; Delijaicov, S.; Lima, N.B. Superficial integrity analysis in a super-duplex stainless steel after turning. J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf. Eng. 2006, 18, 335–338. [Google Scholar]
  2. Biksa, A.; Yamamoto, K.; Dosbaeva, G.; Veldhuis, S.C.; Fox-rabinovich, G.S.; Elfizy, A.; Wagg, T.; Shuster, L.S. Wear behavior of adaptive nano-multilayered AlTiN/MexN PVD coatings during machining of aerospace alloys. Tribol. Int. 2010, 43, 1491–1499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Paro, J.; Hänninen, H.; Kauppinen, V. Tool wear and machinability of HIPed P/M and conventional cast duplex stainless steels. Wear 2001, 249, 279–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Nilsson, J.-O.; Kangas, P.; Wilson, A.; Karlsson, T. Mechanical properties, microstructural stability and kinetics of σ phase formation in 29Cr–6Ni–2Mo–0.38N in super duplex stainless steel. Metall. Mater. Trans. 2000, 31, 35–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Nilsson, J.-O. Overview superduplex stainless steels. Mater. Sci. Technol. 1992, 8, 685–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Corrêa, J.G.; Schroeterb, R.B.; Machadoa, A.R. Tool life and wear mechanism analysis of carbide tools used in the machining of martensitic and supermartensitic stainless steels. Tribol. Int. 2017, 105, 102–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Paiva, J.M.; Torres, R.D.; Amorim, F.L.; Covelli, D.; Tauhiduzzaman, M.; Veldhuis, S.C.; Dosbaeva, G.; Fox-Rabinovich, G. Frictional and wear performance of hard coatings during machining of superduplex stainless steel. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 24, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Endrino, J.L.; Fox-rabinovich, G.S.; Gey, C. Hard AlTiN-AlCrN PVD coatings for machining of austenitic stainless steel. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2006, 200, 6840–6845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ciftci, I. Machining of austenitic stainless steels using CVD multi-layer coated cemented carbide tools. Tribol. Int. 2006, 39, 565–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sik, I.; Amanov, A.; Kim, J.D. The effects of AlCrN coating, surface modification and their combination on the tribological properties of high speed steel under dry conditions. Tribol. Int. 2015, 81, 61–72. [Google Scholar]
  11. Fox-Rabinovich, G.S.; Paiva, J.M.; Gershman, I.; Aramesh, M.; Cavelli, D.; Yamamoto, K.; Dosbaeva, G.; Veldhuis, S.C. Control of self-organized criticality through adaptive behavior of nano-structured thin film coatings. Entropy 2016, 18, 290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Krolczyk, G.; Legutko, S.; Gajek, M. Predicting the surface roughness in the dry machining of duplex stainless steel DSS. Metalurgija 2013, 52, 259–262. [Google Scholar]
  13. Selvaraj, P.D.; Chandramohan, P.; Mohanraj, M. Optimization of surface roughness, cutting force and tool wear of nitrogen alloyed duplex stainless steel in a dry turning process using Taguchi method. Measurement 2014, 49, 205–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Carlos, O.J.; Anaelmo, E.D.; Rodnei, B. Correlating tool wear, surface roughness and corrosion resistance in the turning process of super duplex stainless steel. J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 2014, 36, 775–785. [Google Scholar]
  15. Jawaid, A.; Olajire, K.; Ezugwu, O. Machining of martensitic stainless steels (JETHETE) with coated carbides. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 2001, 215, 769–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Aihua, L; Jianxin, D.; Haibing, C.; Yang, C.; Jun, Z. Friction and wear properties of TiN, TiAlN, AlTiN and CrAlN PVD nitride coatings. Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard Mater. 2012, 31, 82–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Dobrzański, L.A; Pakuła, D.; Křiž, A. Tribological properties of the PVD andCVD coatings put down onto the nitride tool ceramics. In Proceedings of the 12th International Scientific Conference: Achievements in Mechanical& Materials Engineering, Podgorica, Montenegro, 2–5 April 2003; pp. 267–270. [Google Scholar]
  18. ISO 3685:1993–Tool Life Testing with Single-Point Turning Tools; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1993.
  19. Shaw, M. Metal Cutting Principles, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  20. ISO 25178–2–Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)—Surface Texture: Areal Part 2: Terms, Definitions and Surface Texture Parameters; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012.
  21. Fox-Rabinovich, G.; Totten, G.E. Self-Organization during Friction: Advanced Surface-Engineered Materials and Systems Design; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  22. Jacobson, S.; Hogmark, S. Tribofilms—On the crucial importance of tribologically induced surface modification. In Recent Developments in Wear Prevention, Friction and Lubrication; Nikas, G.K., Ed.; Research Signpost: Kerala, India, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  23. Fox-Rabinovich, G.; Kovalev, A.; Veldhuis, S.; Yamamoto, K.; Endrino, J.L.; Gershman, I.S.; Rashkovskiy, A.; Aguirre, M.H.; Wainstein, D.L. Spatio-temporal behaviour of atomic-scale tribo-ceramic films in adaptive surface engineered nano-materials. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 8780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kalss, W.; Reiter, A.; Derflinger, V.; Gey, C.; EndrinoInt, J.L. Study of PVD AlCrN coating for reducing carbide cutting tool deterioration in the machining of titanium alloys. J. Refract. Metal. Hard Mater. 2006, 24, 399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Bershadsky, L.I.B.I. Kostetsky and the general concept in tribology. Trenie I Iznos (Russ. Frict. Wear) 1993, 14, 6–18. [Google Scholar]
  26. Takago, S.; Gotoh, M.; Sasaki, T.; Hirose, Y. The residual stress measurements of TiCN PVD films. Adv. X-ray Anal. 2002, 45, 365–370. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ho, W.Y.; Huang, D.H.; Hsu, C.H.; Wang, D.Y. Corrosion behaviors of Cr(N,O)/CrN double-layered coatings by cathodic arc deposition. Surf. Coat. Technol. 2004, 172, 177–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Joseph, R.D. ASM Specialty Handbook: Tool Material-Technology and Engineering; ASM International: Almere, The Netherlands, 1 January 1995; pp. 67–77. [Google Scholar]
  29. Noordin, M.Y.; Venkatesh, V.C.; Sharif, S. Dry turning of tempered martensitic stainless tool steel using coated cermet and coated carbide tools. J. Mater. Proc. Technol. 2007, 185, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Junior, A.B.; Diniz, A.E.; Teixeira Filho, F. Tool wear and tool life in end milling of 15–5 PH stainless steel under different cooling and lubrication conditions. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2009, 43, 756–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Trent, E.; Wright, P. Metal Cutting, 4th ed.; Butterworth–Heinemann: London, UK, 2000; p. 464. [Google Scholar]
  32. Melo, A.C.; Milan, J.C.G.; Silva, M.B.; Machado, A.R. Some observations on wear and damage in cemented carbide tools. J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 2006, 28, 269–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Diniz, A.E.; Marcondes, F.C.; Coppini, N.L. The performance evaluation of ceramic and carbide cutting tools in machining of stainless steels. In Tecnologia da Usinagem dos Materiais, 5th ed.; Artliber Editora: São Paulo, Brazil, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  34. ASTM G40-15–Standard Terminology Relating to Wear and Erosion; ASTM: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 1987; Volume 03.02, pp. 243–250.
  35. Choi, J.P.; Lee, S.L. Efficient chip breaker design by predicting the chip breaking performance. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2001, 17, 489–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Fahrion, M.E.; Brown, J.C.; Hassell, J.C. Technical Basis For Improved Reliability Of 347H Stainless Steel Heavy Wall Piping in Hydrogen Service; NACE International: San Diego, CA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  37. Zhou, J.; Bushlya, V.; Avdovic, P.; Stahl, J.E. Study of surface quality in high speed turning of Inconel 718 with uncoated and coated CBN tools. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2012, 58, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Alabdullah, M.; Polishetty, A.; Littlefair, G. Microstructural and surface texture analysis due to machining in super austenitic stainless steel. J. Metall. 2016, 2016, 3685312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Coatings 07 00127 g001 550
Figure 1. Microstructure of the SDSS UNS S32750 at 200× showing the distribution of each phase (Ferrite is continuous phase at 36% while Austenite is second phase at 64%).
Figure 1. Microstructure of the SDSS UNS S32750 at 200× showing the distribution of each phase (Ferrite is continuous phase at 36% while Austenite is second phase at 64%).
Coatings 07 00127 g001
Coatings 07 00127 g002 550
Figure 2. Relation between flank wear and cutting length for uncoated and coated carbide inserts during machining SDSS. Additionally the flank surface for each tool is presented at the end of tool life.
Figure 2. Relation between flank wear and cutting length for uncoated and coated carbide inserts during machining SDSS. Additionally the flank surface for each tool is presented at the end of tool life.
Coatings 07 00127 g002
Coatings 07 00127 g003 550
Figure 3. (a) General macrograph aspect of the chips, Chip undersurface obtained with (b) uncoated; (c) TiCN + Al2O3; and (d) AlTiN carbide inserts.
Figure 3. (a) General macrograph aspect of the chips, Chip undersurface obtained with (b) uncoated; (c) TiCN + Al2O3; and (d) AlTiN carbide inserts.
Coatings 07 00127 g003
Coatings 07 00127 g004 550
Figure 4. XPS data for tribo-films formed on the worn surface of AlTiN coating. (a) XPS spot on the AlTiN tool rake face; (b) AlTiN XPS high resolution spectra line for Ti2p; (c) AlTiN XPS high resolution spectra line for Al2s; and (d) AlTiN XPS high resolution spectra line for O1s.
Figure 4. XPS data for tribo-films formed on the worn surface of AlTiN coating. (a) XPS spot on the AlTiN tool rake face; (b) AlTiN XPS high resolution spectra line for Ti2p; (c) AlTiN XPS high resolution spectra line for Al2s; and (d) AlTiN XPS high resolution spectra line for O1s.
Coatings 07 00127 g004
Coatings 07 00127 g005 550
Figure 5. Alicona 3D images of the cutting tools after machining of SDSS (a) before, and (b) after etching showing the details of the cutting tools with their major wear mechanisms.
Figure 5. Alicona 3D images of the cutting tools after machining of SDSS (a) before, and (b) after etching showing the details of the cutting tools with their major wear mechanisms.
Coatings 07 00127 g005
Coatings 07 00127 g006 550
Figure 6. Comparison of total wear volume and BUE volume for uncoated and coated tools (a) before, and (b) after etching.
Figure 6. Comparison of total wear volume and BUE volume for uncoated and coated tools (a) before, and (b) after etching.
Coatings 07 00127 g006
Coatings 07 00127 g007 550
Figure 7. SEM images of PVD AlTiN coated insert after machining SDSS: (a) cutting tool before etching; (b) cutting tool after etching; (c–e) cutting tool with different magnifications.
Figure 7. SEM images of PVD AlTiN coated insert after machining SDSS: (a) cutting tool before etching; (b) cutting tool after etching; (c–e) cutting tool with different magnifications.
Coatings 07 00127 g007
Coatings 07 00127 g008 550
Figure 8. SEM images of CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated insert after machining SDSS: (a) cutting tool before etching; (b) cutting tool after etching; (c–f) cutting tool with different magnifications.
Figure 8. SEM images of CVD TiCN + Al2O3 coated insert after machining SDSS: (a) cutting tool before etching; (b) cutting tool after etching; (c–f) cutting tool with different magnifications.
Coatings 07 00127 g008
Coatings 07 00127 g009 550
Figure 9. SEM images of uncoated insert after machining SDSS. (a) Flank face after etching; (b) cutting tool before etching; and; (c) cutting tool with chipping.
Figure 9. SEM images of uncoated insert after machining SDSS. (a) Flank face after etching; (b) cutting tool before etching; and; (c) cutting tool with chipping.
Coatings 07 00127 g009
Coatings 07 00127 g010 550
Figure 10. Three dimensional and SEM images of the machined surface obtained by (a) uncoated insert; (b) TiCN + Al2O3; (c) AlTiN insert and corresponding cutting forces and surface roughness values.
Figure 10. Three dimensional and SEM images of the machined surface obtained by (a) uncoated insert; (b) TiCN + Al2O3; (c) AlTiN insert and corresponding cutting forces and surface roughness values.
Coatings 07 00127 g010
Table
Table 1. Chemical composition and mechanical properties of S32750.
Table 1. Chemical composition and mechanical properties of S32750.
ElementsChemical Composition (%)Proof Strength (0.2% Yield) (Mpa)Tensile Strength (Mpa)ElongationHardness (HRC)
C0.03550800–10001532
Si0.80
Mn1.2
P0.035
S0.02
Cr25
Ni7
Mo4
N0.24
Table
Table 2. Characteristics of coating systems.
Table 2. Characteristics of coating systems.
CoatingProcessLayerStructureResidual Stresses (MPa)Hardness (GPa)Thickness (µm)Roughness, Ra (µm)
AlTiNPVDMonolayerColumnar nano-crystalline [16]293 ± 8835 [16]1.80.039
TiCN + Al2O3CVDBi layerColumnar micro-crystalline [17]439 ± 2031 [17]Sublayer 5, Toplayer 30.038
Table
Table 3. Cutting characteristics during the turning operation of SDSS. Results were calculated according to standard procedures [19].
Table 3. Cutting characteristics during the turning operation of SDSS. Results were calculated according to standard procedures [19].
Type of CoatingChip Thickness (mm)Chip Compression RatioShear Angle (°)Coefficient of FrictionTool Chip Contact Length (mm)
AlTiN0.4330.69360.2670.682
TiCN + Al2O30.5600.54290.4040.797
Uncoated0.6530.46270.4450.903
Table
Table 4. EDS analysis associated with cutting tools in Figure 7, Figure 8 and Figure 9.
Table 4. EDS analysis associated with cutting tools in Figure 7, Figure 8 and Figure 9.
EDSChemical Composition %
FeWOCrNiCTiNAl
126.37.5530.3716.044.2523.490.54–1.41
20.112.1020.21.200.3014.002.5412.5049.20
334.061.3713.1215.93.9224.953.00–0.75
40.110.9254.45–0.1028.70.56–29.13
50.1166.413.001.13–23.000.1–0.50
644.20.815.0018.0841518.20.48–0.42
Table
Table 5. A summary of the main causes and suggested solutions of different wear mechanisms observed for uncoated and coated tools.
Table 5. A summary of the main causes and suggested solutions of different wear mechanisms observed for uncoated and coated tools.
Cutting ToolWear MechanismMain CausesSuggested Solutions
PVD AlTiNAdhesive wear (Attrition)High strain hardening High ductilityUse very low or very high cutting speeds to decrease the formation of BUE [19]
ChippingBUE formation
DiffusionHigh cutting temperatureIncrease the flow and pressure of the coolant to reduce the cutting temperature
CVD TiCN + Al2O3CracksBUE formationUse very low or very high cutting speeds to decrease the formation of BUE [19]
Abrasive wearBUE fragments
Adhesive wear (Attrition)High strain hardening High ductility
Coating dissipationHigh tensile residual stressesUse PVD coated tools
ChippingCoating dissipation
DiffusionHigh cutting temperatureIncrease the flow and pressure of the coolant to reduce the cutting temperature
UncoatedAdhesive wear (Attrition)High strain hardening High ductilityUse very low or very high cutting speeds to decrease the formation of BUE [19]
ChippingChip jammingUse cutting tool with a proper chip breaker to be able to break chips [35]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Seid Ahmed, Y.; Paiva, J.M.; Covelli, D.; Veldhuis, S.C. Investigation of Coated Cutting Tool Performance during Machining of Super Duplex Stainless Steels through 3D Wear Evaluations. Coatings 2017, 7, 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings7080127

AMA Style

Seid Ahmed Y, Paiva JM, Covelli D, Veldhuis SC. Investigation of Coated Cutting Tool Performance during Machining of Super Duplex Stainless Steels through 3D Wear Evaluations. Coatings. 2017; 7(8):127. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings7080127

Chicago/Turabian Style

Seid Ahmed, Yassmin, Jose Mario Paiva, Danielle Covelli, and Stephen Clarence Veldhuis. 2017. "Investigation of Coated Cutting Tool Performance during Machining of Super Duplex Stainless Steels through 3D Wear Evaluations" Coatings 7, no. 8: 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings7080127

APA Style

Seid Ahmed, Y., Paiva, J. M., Covelli, D., & Veldhuis, S. C. (2017). Investigation of Coated Cutting Tool Performance during Machining of Super Duplex Stainless Steels through 3D Wear Evaluations. Coatings, 7(8), 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings7080127

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop