materials

Article
Research on High Performance Milling of
Engineering Ceramics from the Perspective of
Cutting Variables Setting
Rong Bian 1,2, * , Wenzheng Ding 1 , Shuqing Liu 1 and Ning He 2
1 Industrial Center, Nanjing Institute of Technology; Nanjing 211167, China; [email protected] (W.D.);
[email protected] (S.L.)
2 Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Precision and Micro-Manufacturing Technology, Nanjing University of
Aeronautics & Astronautics; Nanjing 210016, China; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +25-8611-8560




Received: 10 November 2018; Accepted: 26 December 2018; Published: 2 January 2019


Abstract: The setting of cutting variables for precision milling of ceramics is important to both
the machined surface quality and material removal rate (MRR). This work specifically aims at the
performance of corner radius PCD (polycrystalline diamond) end mill in precision milling of zirconia
ceramics with relatively big cutting parameters. The characteristics of the cutting zone in precision
milling ceramics with corner radius end mill are analyzed. The relationships between the maximum
uncut chip thickness (hmax ) and the milling parameters including feed per tooth (f z ), axial depth of
cut (ap ) and tool corner radius (rε ) are discussed. Precision milling experiments with exploratory
milling parameters that cause uncut chip thickness larger than the critical value were carried out.
The material removal mechanism was also analyzed. According to the results, it is advisable to
increase f z appropriately during precision milling ZrO2 ceramics with corner radius end mill. There is
still a chance to obtain ductile processed surface, as long as the brittle failure area is controlled within
a certain range. The appropriate increasing of ap , not only can prevent the brittle damage from
affecting the machined surface, but also could increase the MRR. The milling force increases with
increasing MRR, but the surface roughness can still be stabilized within a certain range.

Keywords: milling; ceramics; ductile machining; PCD; corner radius; material removal rate

1. Introduction

1.1. Machining of Ceramics

Thanks to the favourable combination of outstanding mechanical, thermal and chemical properties,
advanced engineering ceramics, such as oxides, carbides, nitrides, and borides, have received growing
attention in modern industries. It has broad application prospects in mechanical, aerospace, automotive,
electrical, chemical and biological engineering etc. For example, the transplantation of artificial
joints requires that the alternative materials have stable chemical properties in the living body,
good biocompatibility, no component element dissolution and no stimulation to the body, and zirconia
and alumina ceramics are ideal choices. The Power-MEMS (MEMS based power sources) project
developed by researchers has a turbine diameter of only 20 mm, a working speed of at least 500,000 rpm,
and a high temperature of about 1200 K. This requires a small material density, high temperature
resistance, and high strength. Comprehensive assessment, advanced ceramic composite (SiN-TiN) can
meet the demand [1–4]. As an example, zirconia ceramics (ZrO2 ) have the highest fracture toughness
(KIC between 4 and 12 MPa/m1/2 ) and flexural strength, combined with ionic conductivity, excellent
thermal insulating properties and biocompatibility properties. Unique properties make it very suitable

Materials 2019, 12, 122; doi:10.3390/ma12010122 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2019, 12, 122 2 of 14

for advanced applications and some precision components, such as pump impellers for turbomachinery,
diesel injection micro-nozzles, micro-fluidic devices, micro-molds, dental and orthopedic implants.
It is also used for electronic product housing material. The case of smart phones and watches is also
increasingly using zirconia ceramics with a smooth surface and good wear resistance [3].
Like some typical difficult-to-cut materials such as titanium alloys and high-temperature alloys,
keeping high machined surface quality and improving machining efficiency has always been a
key issue. Research works on tool wear, surface integrity and vibration are very necessary for
understanding and optimizing the machining process [5–9]. Cutting force models are also used for
estimation of the cutting forces to avoid unfavourable cutting parameters that lead to wrong use and
premature failure of the tools [10]. At present, the machining of engineering ceramics also faces similar
problems, especially high surface quality is required. Damage-free machining of ceramics has been
studied by several researchers in recent years. It is reported that ceramic materials can be machined
in ductile regime by decreasing the undeformed chip thickness to a sufficiently small value called
“critical depth of cut” or “critical chip thickness”, dc , to get a very smooth machined surface without
brittle damage [11–13]. Most of the research works are focused on precision or ultra-precision grinding
of engineering ceramics in ductile or partial ductile mode [14,15]. However, precision grinding is time
consuming, and it has certain limitations when it comes to complex three-dimensional structures.
To meet the demand of fabricating complex structures, alternative processes to machine ceramics
have been also studied in the last decades. For example, Ferraris et al. [16,17] investigated
the machining behavior of many electrically conductive ceramics, including Al2 O3 -, ZrO2 -, and
Si3 Ni4 -based ceramic composites via electrical discharge machining (EDM). The results demonstrated
the feasible manufacturing of complex shapes and micro features. However, the approach suitability is
mostly limited to some electrically conductive ceramics, such as carbides and composites. Furthermore,
it is the reported the machined surface presents thermal-induced micro-cracks, which may cause
adverse effects on the operational performance of some precision components. With the development
of 3D printing technology, research on the production of ceramic parts through additive manufacturing
(AM) technology has emerged [18–20]. The AM processes for ceramics use ceramics in powder form,
and AM techniques can directly be applied to a ceramic slurry and provide in-situ sintering. By this
way, three-dimensional complex parts can be easily obtained. However, depending on the final
required tolerance and surface quality of the part, especially for the precision part, final machining still
might be needed [3].

1.2. Ductile Mode Milling with Ultra-Hard Tools

Micro milling has many advantages, such as high machining flexibility, removing materials
quantitatively, and machining components with complex three-dimensional structures [21–23].
With the development of ultra-hard materials, different kinds of ultra-hard cutting tools such as
diamond coated tools, polycrystalline diamond (PCD) tools, and cubic boron nitride (CBN) tools
have been used. This makes it possible that materials with high hardness or brittleness, such as
engineering ceramics [24,25], tungsten carbide [26,27], silicon [28] and pure tungsten [29] etc., can be
directly machined in ductile mode by hard milling. Unlike pure cutting, in which the relative tool
sharpness, known as RTS (the ratio of the uncut chip thickness to the cutting edge radius) should
be ≥ 10. For some forming gear tools, RTS can be accepted ≥6. In the case of ductile mode milling,
RTS is always below the critical value, which promotes the formation of large compressive stress into
the chip formation zone, and enhances the plastic deformation of the undergoing material. Successful
attempts on ductile mode milling have been conducted recently. Matsumura and Ono [30] reported
that grooves with axial depth of cut in the range of 15~20 µm can be machined in glass if the CBN
ball end mill is tilted at a certain angle in the feed direction. Bian [24] investigated the feasibility of
ductile mode milling of ZrO2 ceramic with diamond coated end mills, and presented a mirror-like
machined surface and a three-demensional structure. Cheng [31] studied the process of micro milling
tungsten carbide with PCD tools, achieved nanometric surface finish and micro-rib with a width-depth
Materials 2019, 12, 122 3 of 14

ratio of 1:10. Wu [27] also studied the tool wear of self-developed PCD tool in micro milling of
tungsten carbide, and discussed the effect of tool wear on cutting force, surface quality and machined
groove shape.
Thus, ductile mode milling seems a feasible way to achieve complex shape and crack free surface
for hard and brittle materials, such as engineering ceramics. It is also an effective complement to the
following finishing of EDM ceramics and 3D printed ceramics precision parts. However, there is still a
noticeable lack of experience in this specific topic, especially in precision milling of ceramics in hard
state. For instance, serious tool wear despite using ultra-hard tools and very low materials removal
rate due to the micro level cutting parameters [24,32–34].
This work specifically aims at the performance of PCD end mills with corner radius in precision
milling of zirconia ceramics in the hard state with Vickers hardness about HV 1180. The relationship
between cutting parameters and tool corner radius are analyzed. High performance milling
experiments with exploratory cutting parameters that cause uncut chip thickness larger than the critical
value have been carried out to help understand the characteristics of machined surface formation.
Based on that, the author put forward the strategy to improve the material removal rate while ensuring
a high machined surface quality when precision milling ZrO2 ceramics.

2. Analysis on Variables Setting in Precision Milling of Ceramics

2.1. Characteristics of Parameters in Precision Milling Ceramics

In the precision milling process, cutting parameters such as feed per tooth (f z ), axial depth of
cut (ap ), are normally set to a very small value. When the parameters are reduced to a certain extent,
the geometric characteristics of the cutting zone will change. The actual uncut chip thickness h is not
the same as that in conventional milling.
As shown in Figure 1, when groove milling with a flat-bottom end mill, the radial uncut chip
thickness f c at any position during the single cutting process of the cutting edge changes with the tool
rotation angle ϕ, (f c = f z sinϕ). In the feed direction (A-A section, ϕ = 90◦ ), f c reaches the maximum
value, which is equal to f z . In the conventional milling process, as shown in Figure 1c, the cutting
section is approximately rectangular due to the relatively large axial depth of cut, ap . The uncut
chip thickness is mainly determined by the feed per tooth f z . While in the precision milling process,
the characteristics of the milling area are different from that in conventional milling. As shown
in Figure 1d, when the milling parameter especially ap is reduced to the micron level, which may
be smaller than the tool corner radius rε , the part of the cutting edge involved in cutting process
is mainly located at the bottom of the tool nose. The cutting cross-section has an irregular shape
whose thickness is gradually reduced from the surface to be machined to the surface that has been
machined. Thus, there is a maximum uncut chip thickness, hmax , as shown in Figure 2a. As shown in
Figure 2b–d, the actual uncut chip thickness is different at different locations such as B1, B2, and B3 in
the cutting zone.
According to the assumption of Befano [12], to get high machined surface quality, the uncut
chip thickness h should be smaller than the critical chip thickness of materials dc , the material will be
removed in ductile mode, and without brittle failure. A conservative parameter setting strategy is to
keep the hmax less than the critical value dc of the material [24]. Therefore, it could ensure the material
will be removed in completely ductile mode without brittle failure.
Materials 2019,
Materials 12, x122
2019, 12, FOR PEER REVIEW 4 4of
of 14
14
Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 14

Figure
Figure 1.
1. Schematic
Schematic of
of groove
groove milling
milling from
from (a)
(a) side
side view,
view, (b)
(b) top
top view
view and
and zoom
zoom in
in of
of cutting
cutting zone
zone in
in
Figure 1. Schematic of groove milling from (a) side view, (b) top view and zoom in of cutting zone in
(c)
(c) conventional
conventional milling and (d) micro precision milling.
(c) conventional milling and (d) micro precision milling.

Figure 2. Schematic of
Figure of (a)
(a)cutting
cuttingzone
zoneininprecision
precisionmilling and
milling andthethe
cross-section view
cross-section of the
view of uncut chip
the uncut
Figure 2. Schematic of (a) cutting zone in precision milling and the cross-section view of the uncut
thickness
chip at different
thickness position
at different of (b)ofB1,
position (b)(c)
B1,B2(c)
and
B2 (d)
andB3.
(d) B3.
chip thickness at different position of (b) B1, (c) B2 and (d) B3.
For the
For the specific selectedf zfzand
specificselected andapa,p,and
andend
endmill with
mill tool
with corner
tool radius
corner rε , the
radius maximum
rε, the maximum uncut chip
uncut
For the specific selected fz and ap, and end mill with tool corner radiusqrε, the maximum uncut
chip
thickness, hmax , hcan
thickness, max, be
can be approximately
approximately calculated
calculated by theby the Equation
Equation (1), when
(1), when 2Ra −2𝑅𝑎 2
ap > − f𝑎z [35].
>𝑓
chip thickness, hmax, can be approximately calculated by the Equation (1), whenp 2𝑅𝑎 −𝑎 >𝑓
[35].
[35]. r q
hmax = rε − rε 2 + f z 2 − 2 f z 2rε ap − ap 2 . (1)
ℎ = 𝑟 − 𝑟 + 𝑓 − 2𝑓 2𝑟 𝑎 − 𝑎 . (1)
ℎ = 𝑟 − 𝑟 + 𝑓 − 2𝑓 2𝑟 𝑎 − 𝑎 . (1)
It can be seen from the Equation (1) that the maximum uncut chip thickness hmax in the cutting
zoneIt can
Itiscan
be seen
affected
be seen
from
by the
from
theper
feed Equation
tooth f z(1)
the Equation
thatdepth
, axial
(1)
the maximum
that the maximum
uncut
of cut ap and thechip
uncut
thickness
corner
chip radius hhofmax
thickness
in tool
the the cutting
nose rε .
max in the cutting
zone is affected by the feed per tooth fz, axial depth of cut ap and the corner radius of the tool nose rε.
zone is affected by the feed per tooth fz, axial depth of cut ap and the corner radius of the tool nose rε.
 Understanding the relationship between hmax and each cutting parameter helps guide the selection of
cutting parameters.
Figure 3 shows the maximum uncut chip thickness hmax changes with fz and ap. For a specific end
mill with tool corner radius rε about 50 μm, when the fz changes from 1 to 10 μm, the ap changes5 of
Materials 2019, 12, 122
from
14
2 to 20 μm, the calculated hmax under each set of parameters show growing trend with the increasing
of fz and ap. The change of fz has a greater impact on hmax than that of ap. It means for a specific cutting
Understanding
tool, smaller fz thewillrelationship
bring smaller hmax. hmax and each cutting parameter helps guide the selection of
between
cutting parameters.
Figure 4 shows the maximum uncut chip thickness hmax changes with rε. and fz. In this case, when
Figure
the axial 3 shows
depth theapmaximum
of cut uncut
is a fixed on chipthe
10 μm, thickness hmaxfrom
fz changes changes
1 to with
10 μm,f z and athe
p . For
toolacorner
specificradius
end
mill with toolfrom
rε changes corner to 100 rμm,
20 radius ε about
the 50
hmaxµm,
showwhen the f z changes
different from
trends. It can1be
to 10
seenµm, ap changes
thethe
that from
hmax increased
2with
to 20the the calculated
µm,increasing hmax
of fz as under
usual, each
while set of parameters
decreased show growing
with the increasing trend
of tool withradius.
corner the increasing
It means
f z and
ofthat when apmachining
. The change with f z has
of the a greater
given fz and aimpact
p, cutting hmax with
on tools than athat of apcorner
bigger . It means forwill
radius a specific
bring a
cutting tool,
smaller hmax. smaller f z will bring smaller h max .

a b 8
7
Case 1
fz increasing 6
6
Value (μm)
5

rε 50 4 4

fz 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 3
2 2
ap 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20
1
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

c 8 d
7 7
8
ap increasing 6 6
6
6 5
5
4
4 4 4
2
3 3
2 2 0 2
10
8 20
1 6 15 1
4 10
0 2 5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 0

Figure3.3.The
Figure Themaximum
maximumuncut
uncutchip
chipthickness
thicknesshmax
hmaxchanges withf zfzand
changeswith andaapp: :(a)
(a)parameters
parameterssetting,
setting,(b)
(b)
2D-view
2D-viewfromfromthe perspectiveofofapa,p(c)
theperspective , (c)2D-view
2D-viewfrom
fromthe perspective
the perspective f z ,fz(d)
ofof , (d)3D-view
3D-viewfrom
fromboth
bothf z fz
andapa.p.
and

Figure 4 shows the maximum uncut chip thickness hmax changes with rε . and f z . In this case,
when the axial depth of cut ap is a fixed on 10 µm, the f z changes from 1 to 10 µm, and the tool corner
radius rε changes from 20 to 100 µm, the hmax show different trends. It can be seen that the hmax
increased with the increasing of f z as usual, while decreased with the increasing of tool corner radius.
It means that when machining with the given f z and ap , cutting tools with a bigger corner radius will
bring a smaller hmax .
 Materials2019,
Materials 2019,12,
12,122
x FOR PEER REVIEW 66ofof1414
Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 14
a b 8
a Case 2 b 6
8
Case 2 Value (μm) 6 56

6 45
rε Value (μm)
20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90,100,110 4
34
frzε 20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90,100,110
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 4
2 23
afpz 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
10 rε increasing
2 12
ap 10 rε increasing
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
c d
8
c d 6
6
8 8
56
6 56
fz increasing 68
6 45 45
46
4
fz increasing
34 24 34
4
2 23 02 23
10
2 12 0 120 12
5 100
10 80
0 60 120
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 1 5 0 20 40 rε 100 1
80
0 rε 60
0 20 40 rε
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
rε
Figure 4. The maximum uncut chip thickness hmax changes with fz and rε.: (a) parameters setting, (b)
Figure4.4.The
Figure
2D-view Themaximum
from uncut
uncutchip
the perspective
maximum fz, thickness
ofchip (c) 2D-view
thickness hhmax
from
max changes with ffzzand
the perspective
changes with ofrε.rr:ε.
and ε,(a)(a)
:(d) parameters
3D-view from
parameters setting,
both(b)
setting, fz
(b) 2D-view
and rε. from
2D-view fromthe perspectiveofoffzf,z(c)
theperspective , (c)2D-view
2D-viewfrom
fromthe
theperspective
perspectiveof of rrεε, ,(d)
(d)3D-view
3D-viewfrom
fromboth
both fz
f zand
andrεr.ε .
2.2 Parameters Selection Criteria in Precision Milling Ceramics
2.2. Parameters Selection Criteria in Precision Milling Ceramics
2.2 Parameters Selection Criteria in Precision Milling Ceramics
Generally, when the milling parameters are selected, as long as the maximum cutting thickness
Generally, when the milling parameters are selected, as long as the maximum cutting thickness is
is limited to the when
Generally, criticalthe
thickness (dc) of the material
milling parameters brittle-plastic
are selected, as long astransition (hmax <cutting
the maximum dc), anythickness
position
limited to the critical thickness (dc ) of the material brittle-plastic transition (hmax < dc ), any position of
of the cutting
is limited arccritical
to the region thickness
can be ensured
(dc) ofthat
the the uncutbrittle-plastic
material chip thicknesstransition
is less than dc, and
(hmax < dc),the
anymachined
position
the cutting arc region can be ensured that the uncut chip thickness is less than dc , and the machined
surface for ductility
of the cutting arc regionremoval
can becan be obtained.
ensured that the uncut chip thickness is less than dc, and the machined
surface for ductility removal can be obtained.
surfaceFigure 5 is a schematic
for ductility removalsketch
can beofobtained.
the machined surface on the groove edge. During each cutting
Figure 5 is a schematic sketch of the machined surface on the groove edge. During each cutting
process, the 5material
Figure was removed
is a schematic sketch by the machined
of the cutting edge, and the
surface machined
on the groovesurface area A each
edge. During was formed
cutting
process, the material was removed by the cutting edge, and the machined surface area A was formed
due to the
process, thetool cornerwas
material radius. As theby
removed cutting process
the cutting continues
edge, and theinmachined
the feed direction, theAcontinuously
surface area was formed
due to the tool corner radius. As the cutting process continues in the feed direction, the continuously
generated
due to the new machined
tool corner surface
radius. area
As the A overlaps
cutting processeach other closely
continues in accordance
in the feed direction, with the pitch of
the continuously
generated new machined surface area A overlaps each other closely in accordance with the pitch of
feed per tooth,
generated new fmachined
z, to form surface
the machined
area A surface
overlapsarea
eachB other
(Figure 5a). Due
closely to the existence
in accordance with theof the tool
pitch of
feed per tooth, f z , to form the machined surface area B (Figure 5a). Due to the existence of the tool
corner
feed perradius,
tooth, the
fz, tocloser
form tothethe machined
machined surface
surface areaBBis, the smaller
(Figure 5a). Due thetouncut chip thickness
the existence is.
of the tool
corner radius, the closer to the machined surface B is, the smaller the uncut chip thickness is. Therefore,
Therefore,
corner radius,it is generally
the closeralways
to themachined
machinedinsurface
ductile mode nearsmaller
B is, the the machined
the uncutsurface
chiparea B.
thickness is.
it is generally always machined in ductile mode near the machined surface area B.
Therefore, it is generally always machined in ductile mode near the machined surface area B.

Figure 5. Schematic sketch of machined surface on groove edge: (a) different surface morphology of
Figure 5. Schematic sketch of machined surface on groove edge: (a) different surface morphology of
area A and B; (b) illustration of the effect of the brittle failure zone on the machined surface.
area A and
Figure B; (b) illustration
5. Schematic sketch ofofmachined
the effectsurface
of the brittle failure
on groove zone(a)
edge: ondifferent
the machined
surfacesurface.
morphology of
area A and B; (b) illustration of the effect of the brittle failure zone on the machined surface.
Materials 2019, 12, 122 7 of 14

According to the assumption of Befano [12], it can be deduced that when the hmax is bigger than
the dc of material, the material on corresponding position will occur brittle damage (marked with
A1), as shown in Figure 5b. Additionally, the area A2 where near the machined surface still show
a smooth surface. If the brittle fracture area is large enough to extend below the machined surface,
as the area marked with 1 , the damaged area will not be removed completely during the subsequent
cutting process. Part of the damaged area will finally remain on the machined surface area B and
present a brittle fracture surface morphology. However, if the brittle fracture area is controlled in a
small range, and does not extend to the machined surface, as the area marked with 2 , these damaged
areas will be removed during the following cutting process completely. Therefore, a smooth surface
still can be obtained finally. This reveals that when hmax is appropriately larger than dc , the ductile
surface can be still theoretically obtained. Therefore, when precision milling hard and brittle materials,
the strategy of setting the milling parameters can be improved by appropriately increasing the hmax ,
actually the f z and ap , which will increase the material removal rate, and still have a chance to get
asmooth machined surface.

3. Experimental Setups

3.1. Workpiece Material

As described above, ZrO2 ceramics is currently used in a broad range of industrial applications.
The workpiece material employed in this work was an yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia (Y-TZP) with
a 2 wt% of Al2 O3 . The starting powder mixture (TM2 grade) contained yttria-free monoclinic ZrO2
powder mixed in such a ratio that the overall content of Y2 O3 stabilizer was 2 mol%. The material was
prepared by hot pressing at a pressure of 28 MPa and at a temperature of 1450 ◦ C for 1 h. The material
was characterized by relative high fracture toughness and modest hardness; Table 1 summarizes
relevant properties of the ZrO2 ceramic work piece used during investigation.

Table 1. Chemical composition and mechanical properties of the workpiece material.

Composition
Y2 O3 content (mol%) 2
Al2 O3 content (wt%) 2
Physical and Mechanical Properties
Density ρ (g/cm3 ) 6.02
Young’s modulus E (GPa) 223
Fracture Toughness KIC (MPam1/2 ) 11.1 ± 0.7
Hardness HV10 (kg/mm2 ) 1180 ± 13

3.2. PCD Micro End Mills

The milling tools used in this study were single flute PCD end mills with a corner radius of 0.1 mm.
The tool blank was made of a tungsten carbide tool shank and the PCD compact (Element 6, CMX850,
average grain size s <1 µm) which was brazed on it. Figure 6 shows the structure and tool geometry
of the PCD end mill. The cutting edge was designed to be straight in shape. The tool diameter was
about 4 mm. The rake angle (α) and flank angle (γ) of the cutting edge were 0◦ and 5◦ respectively;
hence, providing a robust cutting edge geometry to withstand cutting loads. The geometry of cutting
edge was preformed by Wire cut Electrical Discharge Machining (WEDM), and then ground by a
precision tool grinder. The cutting edge radius was measured to be less than 3 µm by a Leica DVM5000
microscope. The quality of the cutting edge was checked by scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
The set of tool parameter is listed in Table 2.
Materials 2019, 12, 122 8 of 14
Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14

Figure 6. (a)SEM image of the polycrystalline diamond (PCD) end mill and (b) measuring of cutting
edge radius.

2. Tool
Table 2.
Table Tool parameters
parameters of
of the
the PCD
PCD corner
corner radius
radius end
end mills.
mills.
Tool Parameters
Tool Parameters Value Value
grain size ss (µm)
grain size (μm) <1 <1
Tool diameter D
Tooldiameter D(mm)
(mm) 4 4
Tool corner radius rε (mm) 0.1
Tool corner radius rε (mm)
Rake angle α (◦ ) 0
0.1
Rake angle
Flank angle γ α ((°)
◦) 5 0
Flank angle γ (°)
Cutting edge radius r β (µm) <3 5
Cutting edge radius rβ (μm) <3
3.3. Experimental Conditions and Procedures
3.3. Experimental Conditions and Procedures
In this study, two experimental campaigns were carried out. In order to clarify the characteristics
of theInmachined
this study, two experimental
surface when using campaigns
corner radius wereendcarried out.first
mill, the In order to clarifycase
experimental the characteristics
1 was set with
of theaxial
fixed machined
depth surface when using
of cut, spindle corner
rotating speed, radius
but end mill, feed
different the first
per experimental case 1 was
tooth, which resulted set with
in different
fixed axial depth of cut, spindle rotating speed, but different feed per
hmax , as listed in case 1 in Table 3. After the experiments, the characteristics of the groove shoulder tooth, which resulted in
different
were hmax, as
observed bylisted
SEM to in help
case understanding
1 in Table 3. After the experiments,
the material the characteristics of the groove
removal mechanism.
shoulder were observed by SEM to help understanding the material removal mechanism.
According to the previous Tableanalysis, when the
3. Experimental end mill
parameters ofis
theselected,
two cases.hmax is mainly determined by
fz and ap. The change of fz has a greater influence on the value of hmax. In the second part, case 2, by
Spindle Rotating Feed Per Tooth Milling Depth Maximum Uncut Chip
selectingNo. differentSpeed
combinations
n/rpm
of fz and ap, the calculated
f z /µm
hmax of each group
ap /µm
can be set to am almost
Thickness hmax /µm *
similar level about 2 μm. Therefore, from test 1 to 4, fz appears to decrease gradually from 5 to 2 μm,
Case 1
and ap exhibits a multiple increase from 10 μm to a relatively bigger value about 80 μm, as listed in
1
case 2 in Table 3. Thus, the maximum uncut 3 chip thickness20hmax was limited in a1.8 small value, but the
2 8000 8 20 4.5
material removal
3
rate was increased. After10
the experiments, 20
the cutting force and
5.7
machined surface
roughness were analyzed to see the performance of using exploratory milling parameters.
Case 2
The experiments were conducted on a precision milling machine center (DMG Ultrasonic 20
1
linear, Stuttgart, Germany). A view of the 5 experiment setups 10 and the sketch of 2.08
groove milling are
2 3 25 1.96
shown in 3Figure 7. Workpieces
8000 were attached 2.5 on the fixture with
40 wax, and the surfaces
1.99 of the samples
were precisely
4 ground to insure flatness 2 and alignment. 80 The fixture was then
1.96 mounted on a
dynamometer (Kistler type 9272, Kistler Group,
* Tool corner Winterthur,
radius rε 0.1 mm. Switzerland) used to measure the
cutting force. The milling process was conducted in wet condition, using a water based emulsion to
remove chips and
According debris.
to the After analysis,
previous the tests, when
the machined
the end surface was cleaned
mill is selected, hmax by an ultrasonic
is mainly cleaning
determined by
fmachine
z and a p and
. Thethe surface
change of roughness
f z has a of
greater the grooves
influence were
on the measured
value of hby
maxa. Mahr
In the Perthomometer
second part, caseM12,
(ISO 4287). The machined surface topography was inspected by an SEM.
by selecting different combinations of f z and ap , the calculated hmax of each group can be set to am
almost similar level about 2 µm. Therefore, from test 1 to 4, f z appears to decrease gradually from 5 to
2 µm, and ap exhibits a multiple increase from 10 µm to a relatively bigger value about 80 µm, as listed
in case 2 in Table 3. Thus, the maximum uncut chip thickness hmax was limited in a small value, but the
Materials 2019, 12, 122 9 of 14

material removal rate was increased. After the experiments, the cutting force and machined surface
roughness were analyzed to see the performance of using exploratory milling parameters.
The experiments were conducted on a precision milling machine center (DMG Ultrasonic 20
linear, Stuttgart, Germany). A view of the experiment setups and the sketch of groove milling are
shown in Figure 7. Workpieces were attached on the fixture with wax, and the surfaces of the
samples were precisely ground to insure flatness and alignment. The fixture was then mounted on a
dynamometer (Kistler type 9272, Kistler Group, Winterthur, Switzerland) used to measure the cutting
force. The milling process was conducted in wet condition, using a water based emulsion to remove
chips and debris. After the tests, the machined surface was cleaned by an ultrasonic cleaning machine
and the surface roughness of the grooves were measured by a Mahr Perthomometer M1 (ISO 4287).
The machined
Materials 2019, 12, surface topography
x FOR PEER REVIEW was inspected by an SEM. 9 of 14

Figure 7. (a) Experimental setups and (b) a sketch of groove milling.

4. Results and Discussion Table 3. Experimental parameters of the two cases.

Spindle
4.1. Possibility RotatingMachining
of Increasing Feed Per
Efficiency Milling Depth Maximum Uncut Chip
No.
Speed n/rpm Tooth fz/μm ap/μm Thickness hmax/μm *
Figure 8 shows the SEM images of the milling shoulder in the experiment case 1. The hmax in the
Case 1
three trials is 1.8, 4.5 and 5.7 µm, respectively. According to Bifano’s empirical formula, the critical
1 3 20 1.8
uncut chip thickness of the test ZrO2 , dc , is calculated to be about 2.6 µm by Equation (2):
2 8000 8 20 4.5
3 10   202
E K IC 5.7
dc = 0.15Case 2 , (2)
H H
1 5 10 2.08
2 KIC is the fracture toughness, H is
where 3 the hardness, and 25 E is the elastic modulus (see Table 1) [12].
1.96
8000
Thus,
3 in test 1, the h max is about 1.8 µm, less
2.5 than the critical
40 value. The material in cutting
1.99 area should
be 4removed totally in ductile mode without 2 brittle damage. 80As shown in Figure 8a,1.96 the machined area
in milling shoulder presents a complete plastic texture. In test
* Tool corner radius rε 0.1 mm. 2, due to the increase of f z , the hmax
is increased to about 4.5 µm that is bigger than the size of dc . As shown in Figure 8b, the machined
area
4. near the
Results and milling
Discussionshoulder where marked with hmax , shows some brittle damage. However,
the machined area away from the milling shoulder still shows the shape of ductile cutting. The same
4.1. Possibilityalso
phenomenon of Increasing
appears in Machining
test 3, as Efficiency
shown in Figure 8c, the brittle damage region is obviously larger
than Figure
that in 8test 2. The results verify
shows the SEM images of the the previous
millinganalysis
shoulder ininpart
the2.experiment
When the maximum
case 1. Theuncut
hmax inchip
the
thickness h
three trials max is appropriately larger than
is 1.8, 4.5 and 5.7 μm, respectively. d c , a certain degree of brittle failure occurs near
According to Bifano’s empirical formula, the criticalthe milled
shoulder.
uncut chipWhen the of
thickness damaged areas
the test ZrO are limited, the machined surface could still exhibit a ductile
2, dc, is calculated to be about 2.6 μm by Equation (2):
removal morphology.
𝐸 𝐾
𝑑 = 0.15 , (2)
𝐻 𝐻
where KIC is the fracture toughness, H is the hardness, and E is the elastic modulus (see Table 1) [12].
Thus, in test 1, the hmax is about 1.8 μm, less than the critical value. The material in cutting area should
be removed totally in ductile mode without brittle damage. As shown in Figure 8a, the machined
area in milling shoulder presents a complete plastic texture. In test 2, due to the increase of fz, the hmax
is increased to about 4.5 μm that is bigger than the size of dc. As shown in Figure 8b, the machined
area near the milling shoulder where marked with hmax, shows some brittle damage. However, the
machined area away from the milling shoulder still shows the shape of ductile cutting. The same
Materials 2019, 12, 122 10 of 14
Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 14

ductile machined region

b
milling
brittle damage region shoulder

machined
surface
ductile machined region

c
brittle damage region

ductile machined region

Figure 8. Characteristics of machined surface under different hmax , (a) f z = 3 µm, ap = 20 µm,
Figure 8. Characteristics of machined surface under different hmax, (a) fz = 3 μm, ap = 20 μm, hmax = 1.8
hmax = 1.8 µm (b) f z = 8 µm, ap = 20 µm, hmax = 4.5 µm (c) f z = 10 µm, ap = 20 µm, hmax = 5.7 µm.
μm (b) fz = 8 μm, ap = 20 μm, hmax = 4.5 μm (c) fz = 10 μm, ap = 20 μm, hmax = 5.7 μm.
Figures 9 and 10 show the comparison of milling force, the machined surface roughness Ra and
Figuresmaterial
the relative 9 and 10removal
show the comparison
rate of milling
(take the MRR of testforce, the unit)
1 as one machined surface
of each test inroughness
case 2. From Ra and
test
1 to 4, the feed per tooth (f z ) was reduced by 60%, however, a significant increase of axial depthtest
the relative material removal rate (take the MRR of test 1 as one unit) of each test in case 2. From of
1 to (a
cut 4,pthe feed per the
) increased tooth (fz) wasremoval
material reduced rate
by 60%, however,
by 2.2 times. aAs significant
shown inincrease
Figure of 9, axial depth of
the milling cut
force
(ap) increased
presents the material
an obvious removal
increasing trendrate bytest
from 2.21times. As shown
to 4, due in Figure 9,
to the increasing of the milling
removal force presents
material volume.
an obvious increasing trend from test 1 to 4, due to the increasing of removal
In each test, due to the existence of tool corner radius, the axial milling force Fz is much bigger material volume. In
than
each
Fx andtest,
Fy,due to the
which canexistence
produce of toolcompressive
large corner radius, the in
stress axial
themilling force Fz zone,
chip formation is much andbigger than Fx
it is reported
and Fy, which can produce large compressive stress in the chip formation zone,
benfitial for the ductile machining process [36]. It can be seen from the Figure 10, the measured surface and it is reported
benfitial forRathe
roughness of ductile
the fourmachining
tests are allprocess
below [36].
0.1 µm.It can be seen from
Specifically, the Ra theinFigure
test 3 is10, the
the measured
largest with
surface roughness Ra of the four tests are all below 0.1 μm. Specifically, the Ra
the average value about 0.083 µm, and in the other three tests are around 0.06 µm. It is revealed that in test 3 is the largest
with the
when average value
machining about
ceramics by 0.083
cornerμm, andend
radius in the other
mill, the three
proper tests are around
increase in the 0.06
axialμm.
depth It isofrevealed
cut can
that when machining ceramics by corner radius end mill, the proper increase in
improve the material removal rate, while still possible to achieve a satisfactory surface roughness. the axial depth of cut
can improve the material removal rate, while still possible to achieve a satisfactory surface roughness.
 Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 14

Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 14

Materials 2019, 12, 122 20 4 11 of 14
MRR
Fx
2015 43

Cutting Force (N)

Fy

Relative MRR (-)

MRR
Fz
Fx
1510 32

Cutting Force (N)

Fy

Relative MRR (-)

Fz
10 5 21

50 10
1 2 3 4
Test NO.
0 0
1 2 3 4
Figure 9. Cutting force and relative material removal rate (MRR) of each test in case 2.
Test NO.

Figure 9. Cutting force and relative material removal rate (MRR) of each test in case 2.
Figure 9. Cutting force and relative material removal rate (MRR) of each test in case 2.
0.100 4
MRR
Ra
0.080

Relative MRR (-)

0.100 43
MRR
Ra (μm)

0.060 Ra
0.080
32

Relative MRR (-)

0.040
Ra (μm)

0.060
0.020 21
0.040
0.000 10
0.020 1 2 3 4
Test NO.
0.000 0
Figure 10. Surface1 roughness 2 3 MRR of each
Ra and relative 4 test in case 2.
Figure 10. Surface roughness Ra and relative MRR of each test in case 2.
Test NO.
4.2. Material Removal Mechanism
4.2. Material Removal Mechanism
Figure 11 shows Figurethe 10. Surface
topography roughness of theRabrittle
and relative
fracture MRR inoftheeach test inshoulder
milled case 2. and a schematic
Figure 11 shows the topography of the brittle fracture
sketch to help understand the material removal mechanism. In the area near milling shoulder, in the milled shoulder and a schematic
the actual
4.2. Material
sketch to Removal
help Mechanism
understand the material removal mechanism. In the area near milling shoulder, the
uncut chip thickness is greater than the critical uncut chip thickness of the material brittle plastic
actual
transition.uncut chip thickness is greater than the critical uncut chip thickness of the material brittle
Figure 11The showsmaterial removal mode
the topography of theis brittle
mainlyfracture
based in onthelocal brittle
milled fracture,
shoulder and however,
a schematic some
plastic transition.
scratches in the The material
plastic deformation removal mode is mainly
can be based on local brittle fracture,in thehowever, some
sketch to help understand the materialmode removalalso mechanism. found Intothe bearea
distributed
near milling brittle failure
shoulder, the
scratches
zone,uncut in
as shown the plastic deformation mode also can be found to be distributed in the brittle failure
actual chip in Figure is
thickness 11a. The than
greater overallthemorphology
critical uncutis chip somewhatthickness different
of the frommaterialthe brittle
natural
zone, as surface
fracture shown in Figure 11a.of The overallthat morphologyanisuneven, somewhat different from the natural fracture
plastic transition. morphology
The material removal zirconia mode exhibits
is mainly based on local rough, and fracture,
brittle highly grainy
however,appearance
some
surface
(see Figure morphology
11b). A more of zirconia
subtle view that exhibits
in Figure an uneven,
11cbe shows rough, and highly grainy appearance (see
scratches in the plastic deformation mode also can foundthat to beregular zirconia
distributed inparticles
the brittle arefailure
visible
Figure
in the 11b). A more subtle view in Figure 11c shows that regular zirconia particles are visible in the
zone, as brittle
shownfailure
in Figure zone where
11a. alwaysmorphology
The overall presented in is the form ofdifferent
somewhat pits marked from with a 1. The
the natural plastic
fracture
brittle failure
scratched areazone
(markedwhere always
with inpresented
a 2that Figure in the
11c) form ofsmoothpits marked with a 1. The plastic scratched
surface morphology of zirconia exhibits anexhibits
uneven,a rough, surface.
and highly grainy appearance (see
area As(marked
canAbe with a 2
understood in Figurefrom 11c) exhibits a
11d,showssmooth
during surface.
the cutting process, the material to beincut
Figure 11b). more subtle view in Figure 11c that regular zirconia particles are visible theis
As
subjected can be
tozone understood
brittle fracture, from
and Figure 11d,
the crackinisthe during
generated the cutting
andmarked
expandedprocess, the material to be cut is
brittle failure where always presented form of pits withina the front
1. The to cause
plastic brittle
scratched
subjectedoftothe
fracture brittle fracture,
material to formand an the irregular
crack is generated
fractured and expanded
surface. Wheninthe thecutting
front to cause
edge brittle
is swept,
area (marked with a 2 in Figure 11c) exhibits a smooth surface.
fracture
the As
materialof the material
below to
the cutting form an
surface irregular
(marked fractured
with a the surface.
1) does When
not contact the cutting edge is swept, the
can be understood from Figure 11d, during cutting process,the the cutting
materialedgetoand be forms
cut is a
material
lot of pitsto below
that the cutting
present surface fractured
the original (marked with a 1)morphology, does not contact thematerial
cutting edge andthe forms
cuttinga
subjected brittle fracture, and the crack is surface generated and expanded and thein the front above
to cause brittle
lot of
surfaceofpits that
arethe present
plastically the original fractured surface morphology, and the material above the cutting
fracture material deformed
to form andue to the pressing
irregular fracturedand ploughing
surface. Whenaction of the cutting
the cutting edge is edge
swept, during
the
surface
the are
cutting plastically
process. Thedeformed
zirconia due to
particles the pressing
are finally and ploughing
plastically action
deformed of
into thea cutting
smooth edge
micro during
plane
material below the cutting surface (marked with a 1) does not contact the cutting edge and forms a
the cutting
(marked process.
with a 2) with Theductile
zirconia particlesInare
scratches. finallyfrom
general, plastically deformedcharacteristics,
the microscopic into a smooth micro plane
the cutting
material
lot of pits that present the original fractured surface morphology, and the material above the
(marked
in the are with
brittle a 2) with
fracturedeformedductile
zone is brokenscratches. In
along general, from
the crystal, the microscopic
and the material characteristics, the material
surface plastically due to the pressing and ploughing action of in theplastic
cuttingscratch zone is
edge during
in the
removed brittle fracture zone is broken along the crystal, and the material in plastic scratch in zone is
the cuttingwith plastic
process. Thedeformation
zirconia particles in the manner
are finally of transgranular
plastically deformed failure. into
It was also found
a smooth micro the
planetest
(marked
of grinding withzirconia
a 2) withceramics
ductile scratches.
with diamond In general,
tools by from the microscopic
Mohammad [37]. characteristics, the material
in the brittle fracture zone is broken along the crystal, and the material in plastic scratch zone is
Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 14

removed with plastic deformation in the manner of transgranular failure. It was also found in the test
Materials 2019, 12, 122 12 of 14
of grinding zirconia ceramics with diamond tools by Mohammad [37].

Figure 11. SEM

Figure 11. SEMimage
imageofof (a)(a) brittle
brittle fracture
fracture andand plastic
plastic deformation
deformation in groove
in groove edge,
edge; (b) (b) fracture
natural natural
fracture surface
surface of of zirconia;
zirconia; (c) subtle(c) subtle
view view damaged
of micro of micro damaged area and
area and plastic plastic scratched
scratched area; (d)
area; (d) schematic
schematic sketch
sketch of the of theremoval
material materialmechanism.
removal mechanism.

5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions
This paper
This paper presents
presents aa study
study on
on the
the performance
performance of
of corner
corner radius
radius end
end mill
mill in
in precision
precision milling
milling of
of
zirconia ceramics
zirconia ceramics with
with exploratory
exploratory cutting
cutting parameters.
parameters. Characteristics
Characteristics of
of precision
precision milling
milling ceramics
ceramics
and parameters selection criteria were discussed. Based on the results, the following conclusions
and parameters selection criteria were discussed. Based on the results, the following conclusions havehave
been drawn:
been drawn:

•• When precision milling ZrO22 ceramics ceramics with

with aa specific
specific end
end mill,
mill, the
the change
change in in the
the feed
feed per tooth
hasaa greater
fzzhas greater influence
influence onon the maximum uncut chip thickness hhmax thanthat
max than that in
in axial
axial depth
depth of
When ffzzand
cut app.. When andaappare
areconstant,
constant,increasing
increasingthe thecorner
cornerradius
radiusof ofthe
the end
end mill
mill can
can reduce
reduce the
calculated hmaxmax. .
•• It is
is advisable
advisabletoto increase
increase the the
feedfeed per tooth
per tooth appropriately
appropriately during during
precisionprecision
milling ZrOmilling ZrO2
2 ceramics
ceramics
with corner with corner
radius radius
end mills.end
Whenmills.
theWhen the calculated
calculated hmax isthan
hmax is bigger biggerthethan the critical
critical value,
value, even if
even if the shoulder
the milling milling shoulder
has brittle hasfractured,
brittle fractured, there
there is still is still to
a chance a chance
obtain atoductile
obtain processed
a ductile
processed surface,
surface, as long as theasbrittle
long failure
as thearea
brittle failure area
is controlled is acontrolled
within within
certain range. a certainincrease
Appropriate range.
Appropriate increase
of the axial depth of the
of cut, apaxial
, not depth of cut,
only can ap, not
prevent theonly can brittle
minor prevent the minor
damage from brittle damage
affecting the
from affecting the machined surface, but also could increase the material
machined surface, but also could increase the material removal rate. The milling force increases removal rate. The
milling force increases
with increasing with increasing
of machining efficiency, of
butmachining
the surfaceefficiency,
roughnessbut canthe
stillsurface roughness
be stabilized withincana
still be stabilized
certain range. within a certain range.
•• In the area near the milling shoulder, the actual uncut chip thickness thickness is greater than the criticalcritical
uncut chip thickness of the materialmaterial brittle plastic transition. The The machined
machined surface
surface morphology
morphology
is mainly based
based on on local
local brittle
brittle fractured
fractured pits
pits and
and accompanied
accompanied by by some
some ductile
ductile scratches
scratches caused
caused
by plastic deformation. The The material
material inin brittle
brittle fracture
fracture zone
zone is is broken
broken along
along thethe crystal,
crystal, and
and the
the
material
material in the plastic scratch scratch zone is removed with plastic deformation deformation in in the manner
manner of
transgranular failure.
Materials 2019, 12, 122 13 of 14

This study is an initial work on high performance milling of engineering ceramics. It gives a
direction on how to improve the milling efficiency from the perspective of selection milling parameters.
As for the extent to which the cutting parameters can be increased, further research is needed.

Author Contributions: R.B. and N.H. conceived and designed the experiments; R.B. performed the experiments;
R.B., W.D. and S.L. analyzed the data; R.B. wrote the paper.
Funding: This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51805242),
the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (Grant No. BK20160777), and the Scientific Foundation of
Nanjing Institute of Technology (Grant No. YKJ201517). Part of the work was also funded by the Foundation of
Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Precision and Micro-Manufacturing Technology.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to sincerely thank the reviewers for their valuable comments on
this work.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Liu, K.; Reynaerts, D.; Lauwers, B. Influence of the pulse shape on the edm performance of si3n4–tin ceramic
composite. CIRP Ann. 2009, 58, 217–220. [CrossRef]
2. Barry, C.C.; Grant, N.M. Ceramic Materials/Science and Engineering; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2007.
3. Ferraris, E.; Vleugels, J.; Guo, Y.; Bourell, D.; Kruth, J.P.; Lauwers, B. Shaping of engineering ceramics by
electro, chemical and physical processes. CIRP Ann. 2016, 65, 761–784. [CrossRef]
4. Denry, I.; Holloway, J. Ceramics for dental applications: A review. Materials 2010, 3, 351–368. [CrossRef]
5. Fernández-Valdivielso, A.; López de Lacalle, L.; Urbikain, G.; Rodriguez, A. Detecting the key geometrical
features and grades of carbide inserts for the turning of nickel-based alloys concerning surface integrity.
Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2016, 230, 3725–3742. [CrossRef]
6. Urbikain, G.; de Lacalle, L.N.L. Modelling of surface roughness in inclined milling operations with
circle-segment end mills. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 2018, 84, 161–176. [CrossRef]
7. Ghani, A.K.; Choudhury, I.A.; Husni. Study of tool life, surface roughness and vibration in machining
nodular cast iron with ceramic tool. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2002, 127, 17–22. [CrossRef]
8. Urbikain, G.; López de Lacalle, L.N.; Fernández, A. Regenerative vibration avoidance due to tool tangential
dynamics in interrupted turning operations. J. Sound. Vib. 2014, 333, 3996–4006. [CrossRef]
9. Polvorosa, R.; Suárez, A.; de Lacalle, L.N.L.; Cerrillo, I.; Wretland, A.; Veiga, F. Tool wear on nickel alloys
with different coolant pressures: Comparison of alloy 718 and waspaloy. J. Manuf. Process. 2017, 26, 44–56.
[CrossRef]
10. Urbikain, G.; Artetxe, E.; López de Lacalle, L.N. Numerical simulation of milling forces with barrel-shaped
tools considering runout and tool inclination angles. Appl. Math. Model. 2017, 47, 619–636. [CrossRef]
11. Shimada, S.; Ikawa, N.; Inamura, T.; Takezawa, N.; Ohmori, H.; Sata, T. Brittle-ductile transition phenomena
in microindentation and micromachining. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 1995, 44, 523–526. [CrossRef]
12. Bifano, T.G.; Dow, T.A.; Scattergood, R.O. Ductile-regime grinding—A new technology for machining brittle
materials. J. Eng. Ind. 1991, 113, 184–189. [CrossRef]
13. Beltrão, P.A.; Gee, A.E.; Corbett, J.; Whatmore, R.W. Ductile mode machining of commercial pzt ceramics.
CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 1999, 48, 437–440. [CrossRef]
14. Zhong, Z.W. Ductile or partial ductile mode machining of brittle materials. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2003,
21, 579–585. [CrossRef]
15. Yanyan, Y.; Bo, Z.; Junli, L. Ultraprecision surface finishing of nano-zro2 ceramics using two-dimensional
ultrasonic assisted grinding. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2009, 43, 462–467. [CrossRef]
16. Ferraris, E.; Reynaerts, D.; Lauwers, B. Micro-edm process investigation and comparison performance of
al3o2 and zro2 based ceramic composites. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 2011, 60, 235–238. [CrossRef]
17. Liu, K.; Ferraris, E.; Peirs, J.; Lauwers, B.; Reynaerts, D. Micro-edm process investigation of si3n4–tin ceramic
composites for the development of micro fuel-based power units. Int. J. Manuf. Res. (IJMR) 2008, 3, 27–47.
[CrossRef]
18. Shahzad, K.; Deckers, J.; Boury, S.; Neirinck, B.; Kruth, J.P.; Vleugels, J. Preparation and indirect selective
laser sintering of alumina/pa micro spheres. Ceram. Int. 2012, 38, 1241–1247. [CrossRef]
Materials 2019, 12, 122 14 of 14

19. Shahzad, K.; Deckers, J.; Zhang, Z.; Kruth, J.P.; Vleugels, J. Additive manufacturing of zirconia parts by
indirect selective laser sintering. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2014, 34, 81–89. [CrossRef]
20. Scheithauer, U.; Weingarten, S.; Johne, R.; Schwarzer, E.; Abel, J.; Richter, H.-J.; Moritz, T.; Michaelis, A.
Ceramic-based 4d components: Additive manufacturing (am) of ceramic-based functionally graded materials
(fgm) by thermoplastic 3d printing (t3dp). Materials 2017, 10, 1368. [CrossRef]
21. Ehmann, K.F.; Devor, R.E.; Kapoor, S.G. Micro/meso-scale mechanical manufacturing–opportunities and
challenges. JSME/ASME Int. Conf. Mater. Process. 2002, 1, 6–13. [CrossRef]
22. Dhanorker, A.; Ozel, T. Meso/micro scale milling for micro-manufacturing. Int. J. Mech. Manuf. Syst. 2008, 1,
23–42. [CrossRef]
23. Dornfeld, D.; Min, S.; Takeuchi, Y. Recent advances in mechanical micromachining. CIRP Ann. Manuf.
Technol. 2006, 55, 745–768. [CrossRef]
24. Bian, R.; Ferraris, E.; He, N.; Reynaerts, D. Process investigation on meso-scale hard milling of zro2 by
diamond coated tools. Precis. Eng. 2014, 38, 82–91. [CrossRef]
25. Bian, R.; He, N.; Ding, W.; Liu, S. A study on the tool wear of pcd micro end mills in ductile milling of zro2
ceramics. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 92, 2197–2206. [CrossRef]
26. Arif, M.; Rahman, M.; San, W.Y. A study on the effect of tool-edge radius on critical machining characteristics
in ultra-precision milling of tungsten carbide. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2013, 67, 1257–1265. [CrossRef]
27. Wu, X.; Li, L.; He, N.; Zhao, G.; Jiang, F.; Shen, J. Study on the tool wear and its effect of pcd tool in micro
milling of tungsten carbide. Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard Mater. 2018, 77, 61–67. [CrossRef]
28. Bai, J.; Bai, Q.; Tong, Z. Multiscale analyses of surface failure mechanism of single-crystal silicon during
micro-milling process. Materials 2017, 10, 1424. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29. Zhong, L.; Li, L.; Wu, X.; He, N. Micro cutting of pure tungsten using self-developed polycrystalline diamond
slotting tools. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 89, 2435–2445. [CrossRef]
30. Matsumura, T.; Ono, T. Cutting process of glass with inclined ball end mill. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2008,
200, 356–363. [CrossRef]
31. Cheng, X.; Nakamoto, K.; Sugai, M.; Matsumoto, S.; Wang, Z.G.; Yamazaki, K. Development of ultra-precision
machining system with unique wire edm tool fabrication system for micro/nano-machining. CIRP Ann.
Manuf. Technol. 2008, 57, 415–420. [CrossRef]
32. Nakamoto, K.; Katahira, K.; Ohmori, H.; Yamazaki, K.; Aoyama, T. A study on the quality of micro-machined
surfaces on tungsten carbide generated by pcd micro end-milling. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 2012, 61,
567–570. [CrossRef]
33. Zhan, Z.; He, N.; Li, L.; Shrestha, R.; Liu, J.; Wang, S. Precision milling of tungsten carbide with micro pcd
milling tool. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2014, 77, 2095–2103. [CrossRef]
34. Bian, R.; Ferraris, E.; Ynag, Y.; Qian, J. Experimental investigation on ductile mode micro-milling of zro2
ceramics with diamond-coated end mills. Micromachines 2018, 9, 127. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Liu, K.; Li, X.; Rahman, M.; Neo, K.; Liu, X. A study of the effect of tool cutting edge radius on ductile cutting
of silicon wafers. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2007, 32, 631–637. [CrossRef]
36. Liu, K.; Li, X.; Liang, S. The mechanism of ductile chip formation in cutting of brittle materials. Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol. 2007, 33, 875–884. [CrossRef]
37. Rabiey, M.; Jochum, N.; Kuster, F. High performance grinding of zirconium oxide (zro2) using hybrid bond
diamond tools. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 2013, 62, 343–346. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).