FEA STRESS ANALYSIS OF DRILL BIT

ABSTRACT

Drilling is a cutting process that uses a drill bit to cut or enlarge a hole of circular
cross-section in solid materials. The drill bit is a rotary cutting tool, often multipoint. The bit
is pressed against the work piece and rotated at rates from hundreds to thousands of
revolutions per minute. This forces the cutting edge against the work piece, cutting off chips
from the hole as it is drilled. Here we are analyzing the drilling tool structurally with aid of
Finite element analysis. Firstly the drill bit is modelled in Catia and the same is imported into
the ANSYS for modal and structural analysis of existing Tungsten carbide tool and D2 steel
material tool. The outcome from the analysis it is observed that with specific condition the
D2 steel material is considered as an alternate material for making drill it. The D2 steel drill
modal analysis the frequency generated is comparatively very close to that of tungsten
carbide similarly in the structural analysis as the equivalent stress, total deformation and
shear stress are also observed to be competitive.

INTRODUCTION

A drill is a tool fitted with a cutting tool attachment or driving tool attachment,
usually a drill bit or driver bit, used for boring holes in various materials or fastening various
materials together with the use of fasteners. The attachment is gripped by a chuck at one end
of the drill and rotated while pressed against the target material. The tip, and sometimes
edges, of the cutting tool does the work of cutting into the target material. This may be slicing
off thin shavings (twist drills or auger bits), grinding off small particles (oil drilling), crushing
and removing pieces of the workpiece (SDS masonry drill), countersinking, counterboring, or
other operations. Drills are commonly used in woodworking, metalworking, construction and
do-it-yourself projects. Specially designed drills are also used in medicine, space missions
and other applications. Drills are available with a wide variety of performance characteristics,
such as power and capacity.
There are many types of drills: some are powered manually, others use electricity
(electric drill) or compressed air (pneumatic drill) as the motive power. Drills with a
percussive action (hammer drills) are mostly used in hard materials such as masonry (brick,
concrete and stone) or rock. Drilling rigs are used to bore holes in the earth to obtain water or
oil. Oil wells, water wells, or holes for geothermal heating are created with large drilling rigs.
Some types of hand-held drills are also used to drive screws and other fasteners. Some small
appliances that have no motor of their own may be drill-powered, such as small pumps,
grinders, etc.
Drilling Machine: A Drilling Machine (also known as a pedestal drill, pillar drill, or
bench drill) is a fixed style of drill that may be mounted on a stand or bolted to the floor or
workbench. Portable models with a magnetic base grip the steel work pieces they drill. A
Drilling Machine consists of a base, column (or pillar), table, spindle (or quill), and drill
head, usually driven by an induction motor. The head has a set of handles (usually 3)
radiating from a central hub that, when turned, move the spindle and chuck vertically, parallel
to the axis of the column. The size of a Drilling Machine is typically measured in terms of
swing. Swing is defined as twice the throat distance, which is the distance from the center of
the spindle to the closest edge of the pillar. For example, a 16-inch (410 mm) Drilling
Machine has an 8- inch (200 mm) throat distance.

Drilling Capacity: Drilling capacity indicates the maximum diameter a given power
drill or Drilling Machine can produce in a certain material. It is essentially a proxy for the
continuous torque the machine is capable of producing. Typically a given drill will have its
capacity specified for different materials, i.e., 10 mm for steel, 25 mm for wood, etc.
For example, the maximum recommended capacities for the DeWalt DCD790
cordless drill for specific drill bit types and materials are as follows:
 Drill Bit: Drill bits are cutting tools used to create cylindrical holes, almost always of
circular cross-section. Drill bits come in many sizes and have many uses. Bits are usually
connected to a mechanism, often simply referred to as a drill, which rotates them and
provides torque and axial force to create the hole. The shank is the part of the drill bit grasped
by the chuck of a drill. The cutting edges of the drill bit are at one end, and the shank is at the
other. Drill bits come in standard sizes, described in the drill bit sizes article. A
comprehensive drill bit and tap size chart lists metric and imperial sized drill bits alongside
the required screw tap sizes.

Tool Geometry
 The spiral (or rate of twist) in the drill bit controls the rate of chip removal. A
fast spiral (high twist rate or “compact flute”) drill bit is used in high feed rate
applications under low spindle speeds, where removal of a large volume of
swarf is required. Low spiral (low twist rate or “elongated flute”) drill bits are
used in cutting applications where high cutting speeds are traditionally used,
and where the material has a tendency to gall on the bit or otherwise clog the
hole, such as aluminum or copper.
  The point angle, or the angle formed at the tip of the bit, is determined by the
material the bit will be operating in. Harder materials require a larger point
angle, and softer materials require a sharper angle. The correct point angle for
the hardness of the material controls wandering, chatter, hole shape, wear rate,
and other characteristics.
 The lip angle determines the amount of support provided to the cutting edge.
A greater lip angle will cause the bit to cut more aggressively under the same
amount of point pressure as a bit with a smaller lip angle. Both conditions can
cause binding, wear, and eventual catastrophic failure of the tool. The proper
amount of lip clearance is determined by the point angle. A very acute point
angle has more web surface area presented to the work at any one time,
requiring an aggressive lip angle, where a flat bit is extremely sensitive to
small changes in lip angle due to the small surface area supporting the cutting
edges.
 The length of a bit determines how long a hole can be drilled, and also
determines the stiffness of the bit and accuracy of the resultant hole. Twist
drill bits are available in standard lengths, referred to as Stublength or Screw-
Machine-length (short), the extremely common Jobber-length (medium), and
Taper-length or Long-Series (long).
The diameter-to-length ratio of the drill bit is usually between 1:1 and 1:10. Much higher
ratios are possible (e.g., “aircraft-length” twist bits, pressured-oil gun drill bits, etc.), but the
higher the ratio, the greater the technical challenge of producing good work. The best
geometry to use depends upon the properties of the material being drilled. The following
table lists geometries recommended for some commonly drilled materials.
Twist Drill Bits: The twist drill bit is the type produced in largest quantity today. It
comprises a cutting point at the tip of a cylindrical shaft with helical flutes; the flutes act as
an Archimedean screw and lift swarf out of the hole. The twist drill bit was invented by
Steven A. Morse of East Bridgewater, Massachusetts in 1861. The original method of
manufacture was to cut two grooves in opposite sides of a round bar, then to twist the bar
(giving the tool its name) to produce the helical flutes. Nowadays, the drill bit is usually made
by rotating the bar while moving it past a grinding wheel to cut the flutes in the same manner
as cutting helical gears.
Twist drill bits range in diameter from 0.002 to 3.5 in (0.051 to 88.900 mm) and can
be as long as 25.5 in (650 mm). The geometry and sharpening of the cutting edges is crucial
to the performance of the bit. Small bits that become blunt are often discarded because
sharpening them correctly is difficult and they are cheap to replace. For larger bits, special
grinding jigs are available. A special tool grinder is available for sharpening or reshaping
cutting surfaces on twist drill bits in order to optimize the bit for a particular material. The
most common twist drill bit has a point angle of 118 degrees, acceptable for use in wood,
metal, plastic, and most other materials, although it does not perform as well as using the
optimum angle for each material. In most materials it does not tend to wander or dig in.
A more aggressive angle, such as 90 degrees, is suited for very soft plastics and other
materials; it would wear rapidly in hard materials. Such a bit is generally self-starting and can
cut very quickly. A shallower angle, such as 150 degrees, is suited for drilling steels and
other tougher materials. This style of bit requires a starter hole, but does not bind or suffer
premature wear so long as a suitable feed rate is used. Drill bits with no point angle are used
in situations where a blind, flat-bottomed hole is required. These bits are very sensitive to
changes in lip angle, and even a slight change can result in an inappropriately fast cutting
drill bit that will suffer premature wear.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Various investigations were carried out in the field of micro-drilling with different
work-piece and tool materials. The effects of different parameters like drill bit
temperature[4], drill diameter[5,7 ],spindle speed & feed[2] on the hole qualities
parameterized by burr height, hole wall roughness were estimated. Nakagawa et al. studied
the influence of workload, based on the measured torque during drilling, on drill temperature
and surface roughness of the drilled hole wall was evaluated. Drill diameter also influences
hole wall roughness. Better roughness is achieved with larger diameters in a certain range [4,
7]. Bhandari et al. established the inter relation between drill diameter and burr height.
Variation of burr height with spindle speed, feed and diameter of drill was found [5]. Zheng
et al. investigated to optimize the drilling parameters for decreasing burr size and thrust force.
Burrs are formed during the entry and exit of the drill bit. Enter burr is formed mainly due to
burr bending and exit burrs are formed both due to burr bending and burr break up [8].
Edoardo Capello found absence of support during drilling to be the main reason behind
delamination. A new support device was built which effectively reduced delamination [9].
Rahamathullah et al. conducted micro drilling on carbon fabric laminate composites using
carbide tool of 0.32mm diameter; measured the thrust force and torque; found the diameter of
the hole, delamination factor and roundness error. A power law based regression model for
thrust force and torque was estimated which approximately matched the results measured
from the experiment [10, 11]. Imran et al. studied surface integrity in micro-drilling. They
concluded that subsurface alterations are driven by thermo-mechanical loading, causing
plasticity and grain refinement by excessive shearing local to the cut surface [12].

Hinds et al. developed the finite element model of drill bit and correlated the
stress in drill bit and tool life. It was confirmed that tools with less stress have longer life
[13]. Yongchen et al. analyzed the dynamic stress in micro drills & drilling machine under
high speed machining. A dynamic model of the system was created using Timoshenko beam
element. The effects of the eccentricity, the drilling axial force, the rotational inertia, the
gyroscopic moment and the spindle bearings on bending deformation of micro-drills during
drilling which leads to the failure of the drill-bit were studied. Stresses on the weakest section
were studied using the measured drilling axial force and torque [14]. Yoon et al. found the
specific energy consumption at different parameters and optimized it [15]. Size effect in
machining is defined as the nonlinear increase in specific cutting force with decrease in
undeformed chip thickness into micro scale. Anand et al. predicted a mathematical model to
relate specific cutting force with the ratio of undeformed chip thickness to cutting edge
radius. The optimized condition to minimize the cutting forces for austenitic stainless steel
was found. Feed affects the radial and thrust components of the forces significantly [16, 17].

Different types & mechanisms of wear such as abrasive, adhesive, flank & chisel
edge wear were studied. A characteristic wear map of cutting conditions was constructed for
the micro-drilling process by Imran et al. which helps in identifying the zones of lowest wear
rate. The wear rate map provides a reference for selecting cutting parameters for objective of
minimum cost and/or maximum productivity [18]. Zheng et al. studied the mechanism of the
wear using a cemented tungsten carbide drill bit. Abrasive as well as adhesive wear along
with the reasons of wear were analyzed. They also demonstrated two body and three body
abrasive wear on the flank surface and the chisel edge of the drill bit. The smaller diameter
drill bits suffer more wear [7, 19, and 20]. Imran et al. compared the tool wear in the dry and
wet machining conditions. The main wear phenomena in wet conditions are abrasion,
diffusion and micro chipping and those in the dry conditions are abrasion, adhesion, macro
chipping and catastrophic failures [21]. Lee et al. did the modelling for cutting force for
alumina green bodies with diamond grit abrasive micro-drills. They also concluded that tool
life decreased linearly with feed due to abrasive wear and chip loading [22].

Wear resistance of cemented carbide micro drill can be augmented by depositing

coating of suitable materials like chromium based thin film coating doped with W-C-N [23],
atomic layer deposition[ALD] coating[24], a-C:H:Nx% coatings with various levels of
nitrogen[25] & TiN/AlN coating[26]. Superior tribological properties in the form of less drill
wear & coefficient of friction along with enhanced tool life were noted with the application
of coatings [23-27]. Nam et al. using nano fluids minimum quantity lubrication showed that
the forces and torques can be decreased, the number of holes can be increased in certain time
and remaining chips and burrs after machining can be eliminated to enhance the quality of the
holes [28].

Effects of drill bit specifications on machining were studied by several

researchers. Drill bits with large helix angles, large flute to land ratio and small web thickness
give excellent performance. Big helix angle, small primary face angles and small point angles
should be implemented in the design of ultra‐small micro drill bits [29]. Gong et al. modelled
for critical speed and critical buckling loads using finite element model and found that both
increase with increase in cross sectional area and helix angle of the drill bit [30]. Zheng et al.
concluded that morphology of chips and hole wall surface depends on the material properties,
feed rate, spindle speed and tool wear. Different types of chips are formed from different
layers of PCB [31]. During machining of PCB different types of chips are formed aluminium
chips from cover board, copper chips from copper foil and discontinuous chips from CFRP.
Feed rate and speed affect the chip morphology [32].
INTRODUCTION TO CATIA

Initially, CATIA is an abbreviation for Computer Aided Three-dimensional Interactive

Application.

In the forties and fifties of the century, for the manufacturing of complex aircraft parts, it was
necessary to working on the development of CAM or computer-aided manufacturing., in
order to be very complex parts for highly complex parts, the role of production engineers
came, in order manufacture these parts by simple machines available to them, but these
simple machines cannot manufacture complex parts design. So, they should have added mind
to the machines, this mind is computer controllers which produced what is known now as
computer aided manufacturing.

With the fast development and increasing complexity of the designs, even painted on paper
became very very difficult, in the sixties of the last century, painstaking attempts was began
to develop software that can help engineers to the drawing and design. Engineers have begun
to collect and arrange what old scientists have reached from drawing equations and
calculations in order to reach formulas can understand and solve intersections and drop
objects, etc., which may mechanical designer require in his work, It was also the military
field generally and the aircraft industry particularly field, which contained competitions
companies to take out the programs drawing and mechanical design by computer.

At this time of the late sixties and early seventies there was in France a man named Dassault
has formed a team called Team CAD-CAM was the task of this team is developing formulas
and relationships that can be built upon drawing program strongest in the world who can
overcome the difficulties mechanical design in general and aircraft design particularly. And
was on the ground, a company called Dassault for Aviation owned by the man who I told you
about him. Marcel Dassault. France began its program to develop self-own drawing program,
and the French are right because they are developing generations of aircraft such as Mirage,
Concorde and other and they need their personal program to work.

The French Dassault Systems is the parent company and IBM participates in the software and
marketing, and CATIA is invades broad industrial sectors, and has been explained in the
previous post position of CATIA between 3d modeling software programs. Classification as a
drawing program, Where CATIA classified under the following software packages:

CAD (Computer Aided Design)

CAM (Computer Aided Manufacturing)

In general CAE (Computer Aided Engineering) CATIA Modules

Version that most of the people works on it now is CATIA V5 or fifth version, which is a
rewriting and revision the code of the fourth edition. For the fifth version, there are versions
from 1 to 20, for example, CATIA V5 R17, it Means CATIA fifth edition version
seventeenth, While years system was adoption in the sixth edition, for example, CATIA V6
2011 means CATIA sixth edition version of Year 2011.

CATIA consists of modules each Module specialized in specific design field.

 Sketcher (2D)

 Part (3D)

 Assembly

 Stress Analysis

 Drafting

 Surface and wireframe

 Simulation
Modeling of Drill bit
 3D Model of Drill bit

FEM

Today the finite element method (FEM) is considered as one of the well-
established and convenient technique for the computer solution of complex problems in
different fields of engineering: civil engineering, mechanical engineering, nuclear
engineering, biomedical engineering, hydrodynamics, heat conduction, geo-mechanics, etc.
From other side, FEM can be examined as a powerful tool for the approximate solution of
differential equations describing different physical processes. The success of FEM is based
largely on the basic finite element procedures used: the formulation of the problem in
variational form, the finite element dicretization of this formulation and the effective solution
of the resulting finite element equations. These basic steps are the same whichever problem is
considered and together with the use of the digital computer present a quite natural approach
to engineering analysis. The objective of this course is to present briefly each of the above
aspects of the finite element analysis and thus to provide a basis for the understanding of the
complete solution process. According to three basic areas in which knowledge is required, the
course is divided into three parts. The first part of the course comprises the formulation of
FEM and the numerical procedures used to evaluate the element matrices and the matrices of
the complete element assemblage. In the second part, methods for the efficient solution of the
finite element equilibrium equations in static and dynamic analyses will be discussed. In the
third part of the course, some modelling aspects and general features of some Finite Element
Programs (ANSYS, NISA, LS-DYNA) will be briefly examined. To acquaint more closely
with the finite element method, some excellent books, like [1-4], can be used.

History of Finite Element Analysis

Finite Element Analysis (FEA) was first developed in 1943 by R. Courant, who
utilized the Ritz method of numerical analysis and minimization of variational calculus. A
paper published in 1956 by M. J. Turner, R. W. Clough, H. C. Martin, and L. J. Topp
established a broader definition of numerical analysis. The paper centered on the "stiffness
and deflection of complex structures". By the early 70's, FEA was limited to expensive
mainframe computers generally owned by the aeronautics, automotive, defense, and nuclear
industries. Since the rapid decline in the cost of computers and the phenomenal increase in
computing power, FEA has been developed to an incredible precision.

Principles of FEA

The finite element method (FEM), or finite element analysis (FEA), is a

computational technique used to obtain approximate solutions of boundary value problems in
engineering. Boundary value problems are also called field problems. The field is the domain
of interest and most often represents a physical structure.

The field variables are the dependent variables of interest governed by the differential
equation. The boundary conditions are the specified values of the field variables (or related
variables such as derivatives) on the boundaries of the field.
The Purpose of FEA

Analytical Solution

• Stress analysis for trusses, beams, and other simple structures are carried out based on
dramatic simplification and idealization:

– mass

the safety margin; and to identify the weakness of the design accurately; and concentrated at
the center of gravity

– beam simplified as a line segment (same cross-section)

• Design is based on the calculation results of the idealized structure & a large safety factor
(1.5-3) given by experience.

FEA

• Design geometry is a lot more complex; and the accuracy requirement is a lot higher. We
need

– To understand the physical behaviors of a complex

object (strength, heat transfer capability, fluid flow, etc.)

– To predict the performance and behavior of the design to calculate

– To identify the optimal design with confidence.

Common FEA Applications

1. Mechanical/Aerospace/Civil/Automotive

2. Engineering

3. Structural/Stress Analysis

o Static/Dynamic

o Nonlinear

4. Fluid Flow
 5. Heat Transfer

6. Electromagnetic Fields

7. Soil Mechanics

8. Acoustics

9. Biomechanics

Advantages:

1. Irregular Boundaries

2. General Loads

3. Different Materials

4. Boundary Conditions

5. Variable Element Size

6. Easy Modification

7. Dynamics

8. Nonlinear Problems (Geometric or Material)

A GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

• Preprocessing

– Define the geometric domain of the problem.

– Define the element type(s) to be used (Chapter 6).

– Define the material properties of the elements.

– Define the geometric properties of the elements (length, area, and the like).

– Define the element connectivities (mesh the model).

– Define the physical constraints (boundary conditions). Define the loadings.

• Solution

– computes the unknown values of the primary field variable(s)

– computed values are then used by back substitution to compute additional, derived
variables, such as reaction forces, element stresses, and heat flow.

• Postprocessing

– Postprocessor software contains sophisticated routines used for sorting, printing, and
plotting selected results from a finite element solution.

ANSYS Software

ANSYS is a finite element analysis software package • Capable of analyzing a range of

engineering applications: - Structural - Thermal - Electromagnetic - Fluid Dynamics •
Unitless analysis, but must be consistent throughout

Processors

1. Preprocessing

Define element type, real constants, and material properties.

Define geometry Processors.

2. Solution

Define type of analysis.

Set boundary conditions.

Apply loads.

Initiate finite element solution.

3. Post processing

Review results using graphical displays and tabular listings.

Verify against analytical solutions.

What Is Model Generation?

In ANSYS terminology, model generation usually takes on the narrower meaning of

generating the nodes and elements that represent the spatial volume and connectivity of the
actual system. Thus, model generation in this discussion means the process of defining the
geometric configuration of the model's nodes and elements. The ANSYS program offers the
following approaches to model generation:

• Creating a solid model within ANSYS.

• Using direct generation.

• Importing a model created in a computer-aided design (CAD) system.

Typical Steps Involved in Model Generation within ANSYS

A common modeling session might follow this general outline (detailed information on
italicized subjects can be found elsewhere in this guide):

Begin by planning your approach. Determine your objectives, decide what basic form your
model will take, choose appropriate element types, and consider how you will establish an
appropriate mesh density. You will typically do this general planning before you initiate your
ANSYS session.

Enter the preprocessor (PREP7) to initiate your model-building session. Most often, you will
build yourmodel using solid modeling procedures.

Establish a working plane.

Generate basic geometric features using geometric primitives and Boolean operators.

Activate the appropriate coordinate system.

Generate other solid model features from the bottom up. That is, create keypoints, and then
define lines, areas, and volumes as needed.

Use more Boolean operators or number controls to join separate solid model regions together
as appropriate.
Create tables of element attributes (element types, real constants, material properties, and
element coordinate

systems).

Set element attribute pointers.

Set meshing controls to establish your desired mesh density if desired. This step is not always
required because default element sizes exist when you enter the program (see Chapter 7,
“Generating the Mesh”).

(If you want the program to refine the mesh automatically, exit the preprocessor at this point,
and activate adaptive meshing.)

ANSYS Modeling and Meshing Guide . ANSYS Release 10.0 . 002184 . © SAS IP, Inc.

Understanding Model Generation

• Create nodes and elements by meshing your solid model.

• After you have generated nodes and elements, add features such as surface-to-surface
contact elements, coupled degrees of freedom, and constraint equations.

• Save your model data to Jobname.DB.

• Exit the preprocessor.

Comparing Solid Modeling and Direct Generation

You can use two different methods to generate your model: solid modeling and direct
generation. With solid modeling, you describe the geometric boundaries of your model,
establish controls over the size and desired shape of your elements, and then instruct the
ANSYS program to generate all the nodes and elements automatically. By contrast, with the
direct generation method, you determine the location of every node and the size, shape, and
connectivity of every element prior to defining these entities in your ANSYS model.

Although some automatic data generation is possible, the direct generation method is
essentially a hands-on, "manual" method that requires you to keep track of all your node
numbers as you develop your finite element mesh. This detailed bookkeeping can become
tedious for large models, contributing to the potential for modeling errors. Solid modeling is
usually more powerful and versatile than direct generation, and is commonly the preferred
method for generating your model.

In spite of the many advantages of solid modeling, you might occasionally encounter
circumstances where direct generation will be more useful. You can easily switch back and
forth between direct generation and solid modeling, using the different techniques as
appropriate to define different parts of your model.

Detailed discussions of solid modeling and direct generation can be found in Chapter 5,
“Solid Modeling” and Chapter 9, “Direct Generation”, respectively. To help you judge which
method might be more suitable for a given situation, the relative advantages and
disadvantages of the two approaches are summarized here.

Solid Modeling

On the plus side, solid modeling

• Is generally more appropriate for large or complex models, especially 3-D models of
solid volumes.

• Allows you to work with a relatively small number of data items.

• Allows geometric operations (such as dragging and rotations) that cannot be done
with nodes and elements.

• Supports the use of "primitive" areas and volumes (such as polygonal areas and
cylindrical volumes) and

• Boolean operations (intersections, subtractions, etc.) for "top down" construction of

your model.

• Facilitates your use of the ANSYS program's design optimization features.

• Is required for adaptive meshing.

• Is required in order to do area mesh refinement after loads have been applied (solid
model loads are also required).

• Readily allows modifications to geometry.

 • Facilitates changes to element distribution; you are not bound to one analysis model.

Importing Solid Models Created in CAD systems

However, solid modeling

• Can sometimes require large amounts of CPU time.

• Can (for small, simple models) sometimes be more cumbersome, requiring more data
entries than direct generation.

• Can sometimes "fail" (the program will not be able to generate the finite element
mesh) under certain circumstances.

• Direct Generation

• On the plus side, direct generation

• Is convenient for small or simple models.

• Provides you with complete control over the geometry and numbering of every node
and every element.

• However, direct generation Is usually too time consuming for all but the simplest
models; the volume of data you must work with can become overwhelming.

• Cannot be used with adaptive meshing.

• Makes design optimization less convenient.

• Makes it difficult to modify the mesh (tools such as area mesh refinement, Smart
Sizing, etc. cannot be used).

• Can become tedious, requiring you to pay more attention to every detail of your mesh;
tedium can sometimes cause you to become more prone to committing errors.

Importing Solid Models Created in CAD systems

As an alternative to creating your solid models within ANSYS, you can create them in your
favorite CAD system and then import them into ANSYS for analysis, by saving them in the
IGES file format or in a file format supported by an ANSYS Connection product. Creating a
model using a CAD package has the following advantages:
 • You avoid a duplication of effort by using existing CAD models to generate solid
models for analysis.

• You use more familiar tools to create models.

• However, models imported from CAD systems may require extensive repair if they
are not of suitable quality for meshing.

Limitations on Joining Different Elements

You must be careful when you directly join elements that have differing degrees of freedom
(DOFs), because there will be inconsistencies at the interface. When elements are not
consistent with each other, the solution may not transfer appropriate forces or moments
between different elements.

To be consistent, two elements must have the same DOFs; for example, they must both have
the same number and type of displacement DOFs and the same number and type of rotational
DOFs. Furthermore, the DOFs must overlay (be tied to) each other; that is, they must be
continuous across the element boundaries at the interface.

Consider three examples of the use of inconsistent elements:

• Elements having a different number of DOFs are inconsistent. SHELL63 and

BEAM4 elements have three displacement and three rotational DOFs per node. SOLID45
elements have three displacement DOFs per node, but lack rotational DOFs. If a SOLID45
element is joined to either a SHELL63 or BEAM4 element, the nodal forces
corresponding to displacement DOFs will be transmitted to the solid element. However, the
nodal moments corresponding to the rotational DOFs of the SHELL63 and BEAM4 elements
will not be transmitted to the SOLID45 element.

• Elements having the same number of DOFs may nevertheless be inconsistent.

BEAM3 (2-D elastic beam) elements and SHELL41 (membrane shell) elements each have
three DOFs per node. However, the shell element has three displacement DOFs (UX, UY
and UZ), while the beam element has only two (UX and UY). Therefore, the UZ result will
reflect the stiffness of the shell element, only. Furthermore, the shell element does not
have the rotational DOF (ROTZ) that the beam element has. The nodal moment
corresponding to the beam element's rotational DOF will not be transmitted to the shell
element. The interface will behave as if the beam was "pinned."

• Both 3-D beam elements and 3-D shell elements have 6 DOFs per node.
However, the ROTZ degree of freedom of the shell element (the drilling mode) is
associated with the in-plane rotational stiffness. This is normally a fictitious stiffness; that is,
it is not the result of a mathematical calculation of the true stiffness. Thus, the ROTZ degree
of freedom of the shell element is not a true DOF. (The exception is when the Allman
Rotational Stiffness is activated for SHELL43 or SHELL63 elements (KEYOPT(3) = 2 for
both).) Therefore, it is not consistent to connect only one node of a 3-D beam element to a 3-
D shell element such that a rotational DOF of the beam element corresponds to the ROTZ of
the shell element. You should not join beams to shells in this manner.

Determining the Appropriate Mesh Density

A question that frequently arises in a finite element analysis is, "How fine should the element
mesh be in order to obtain reasonably good results?" Unfortunately, no one can give you a
definitive answer to this question; you must resolve this issue for yourself. Some of the
techniques you might employ to resolve this question include:

• Use adaptive meshing to generate a mesh that meets acceptable energy error
estimate criteria. (This technique is available only for linear static structural or steady state
thermal problems. Your judgment as to what constitutes an "acceptable" error level will
depend on your analysis requirements.) Adaptive meshing requires solid modeling.

• Compare the results of a preliminary analysis with independently derived

experimental or known accurate analytical results. Refine the mesh in regions where the
discrepancy between known and calculated results is too great. (For all area meshes and for
volume meshes composed of tetrahedra, you can refine the mesh locally with the
NREFINE, EREFINE, KREFINE, LREFINE, and AREFINE commands (Main Menu>
Preprocessor> Meshing> Modify Mesh> Refine At> entity type).)

• Perform an initial analysis using what seems to you to be a "reasonable" mesh.

Reanalyze the problem using twice as many elements in critical regions, and compare the two
solutions. If the two meshes give nearly the same results, then the mesh is probably
adequate. If the two meshes yield substantially different results, then further mesh refinement
might be required. You should keep refining your mesh until you obtain nearly identical
results for succeeding meshes.

• If mesh-refinement testing reveals that only a portion of your model requires a

finer mesh, you can use submodeling to "zoom in" on critical regions.

Mesh density is extremely important. If your mesh is too coarse, your results can contain
serious errors. If your mesh is too fine, you will waste computer resources, experience
excessively long run times, and your model may be too large to run on your computer system.
To avoid such problems, always address the issue of mesh density before you begin your
model generation.

The ANSYS program uses several types of coordinate systems, each used for a different
purpose:

 Global and local coordinate systems are used to locate geometry items (nodes, key
points, etc.) in space.

 The display coordinate system determines the system in which geometry items are
listed or displayed.

 The nodal coordinate system defines the degree of freedom directions at each node
and the orientation of nodal results data.

 The element coordinate system determines the orientation of material properties and
element results data.

 The results coordinate system is used to transform nodal or element results data to a
particular coordinate system for listings, displays, or general post processing
operations.

The working plane, which is separate from the coordinate systems discussed here, is for
locating geometric primitives during the modeling process. See Chapter 4, “Using Working
Planes” for more information about the working plane.

The following coordinate system topics are available:

1. Global and Local Coordinate Systems

2. Display Coordinate System

3. Nodal Coordinate Systems

4. Element Coordinate Systems

Material Properties:

Sl no Material Density(kg/m3) Young’s Poisson’s Ratio

modulus(MPa)

1 Tungsten Crbide 15630 53000 0.31

2 D2 Steel 7700 28000 0.27

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Modal Analysis:

Tungsten carbide tool analysis results:

Boundary conditions in Modal Analysis

Meshed Model of drill bit

Mode shape 1

Mode shape 2
Mode shape 3

Mode shape 4
Mode shape 5

Mode shape 6
D2 Steel Tool Modal Analysis Result:

Mode shape 1
Mode shape 2

Mode shape 3
Mode shape 4

Mode shape 5
 Mode shape 6

Tungsten Carbide Tool Structural analysis results:

Boundary conditions for Structural analysis

Equivalent Stress

Total deformation
 Shear stress

D2 Steel Tool Structural analysis results:

Equivalent Stress
Total deformation

Shear stress
CONCLUSION

In the present FEA analysis the drilling tool structurally with aid of Finite element analysis.
Firstly the drill bit is modelled in Catia and the same is imported into the ANSYS for modal
and structural analysis of existing Tungsten carbide tool and D2 steel material tool. The
outcome from the analysis it is observed that with specific condition the D2 steel material is
considered as an alternate material for making drill it. The D2 steel drill modal analysis the
frequency generated is comparatively very close to that of tungsten carbide similarly in the
structural analysis as the equivalent stress, total deformation and shear stress are also
observed to be competitive.

BIBILOGRAPHY

[1]Kim, C.; Bono, M.; Ni, J. (2002) Experimental analysis of chip formation in micro-
milling. NAMRI/SME, 30: 247–254.

[2] Chae, J.; Park, S.S.; Freiheit, T. (2006) Investigation of micro-cutting operations.
International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 46: 313–332.

[3] Liu, X.; DeVor, R.E.; Kapoor, S.G.; Ehmann, K.F. (2004), The mechanics of machining
at the micro-scale: assessment of the current state of the science. Journal of Manufacturing
Science and Engineering, 126:666–678.

[4] Nakagawa, H.; Ogawa, K.; Kihara, A.; Hirogaki, T.; Improvement of micro-drilled hole
quality for printed wiring boards, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 191 (2007)
293–296

[5] Bhandari,B.;Hong,Y.;Yoon,H.;Moon,J.; Pham,M.; Lee,G.; Huang,Y.; Linke, B. S.;

Dornfeld, D.A.; Ahn, S. ; Development of a micro-drilling burr-control chart for PCB
drilling, Precision Engineering 38 (2014) 221– 229

[6] Anand, R.S.; and Patra,K.; Modeling and simulation of mechanical micro-machining—a
review, Machining Science and Technology, 18:323–347, ISSN: 1091-0344 print /1532-2483

[7] Wang,L.; Zheng , L.; Wang,C.Y.; Li,S.; Song,Y.; Zhang,L.; Sun,P.; "Experimental study
on micro-drills wear during high speed of drilling IC substrate", (2014) Circuit World, Vol.
40 Iss: 2, pp.61 – 70
[8] Zheng,X.; Liu,Z.; An,O. Wang,X.; Xu,Z.; Chen,M.; "Experimental investigation of
microdrilling of printed circuit board", Circuit World, Vol. 39 (2013) Iss: 2, pp.82 – 94

[9] Capello,E.; Workpiece damping and its effect on delamination damage in drilling thin
composite laminates, Journal of Materials Processing Technology Volume 148, Issue 2, 15
May 2004, Pages 186–195

[10] Rahamathullah,I.; and Shunmugam,M.S.; Analyses of forces and hole quality in micro-
drilling of carbon fabric laminate composites, Journal of Composite Materials 0(0) 1–12

[11] Rahamathullah,I.; and Shunmugam,M.S.; Thrust and torque analyses for different
strategies adapted in microdrilling of glass-fibre-reinforced plastic, Proc. IMechE Vol. 225
Part B: J. Engineering Manufacture 33

[12] Imran,M.; Mativenga,P.T.; Gholinia,A. & Withers,P.J.; Evaluation of surface integrity in

micro drilling process for nickel-based super alloy, Int J Adv Manuf Technology (2011)
55:465–476

[13] Hinds, B.K.; Treanor, G.M. (2000) Analysis of stresses in micro-drills using the finite
element method.International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 40: 1443–1456.

[14] Yongchen,P.; Qingchang,T.; Zhaojun,Y.; A study of dynamic stresses in micro-drills

under high-speed machining, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46
(2006) 1892–1900

[15] Yoon,H.; Bhandari,B.; Moon,J.;Kim,C.; Lee,G.; Park,K.W.;Song,C.; Ahn, S. ;Energy

Analysis of Micro-drilling Process Used to Manufacture Printed Circuit Boards, 19th CIRP
International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Berkeley, 2012

[16] Anand, R.S.; Patra,K.; Steiner,M.; Size effects in micro drilling of carbon fiber
reinforced plastic composite, Prod. Eng. Res. Devel. (2014) 8:301–307

[17] Patra,K.; Anand, R.S.; Steiner,M.;and Biermann,D.; Experimental Analysis of Cutting

Forces in Micro drilling of Austenitic Stainless Steel (X5CrNi18-10), Materials and
Manufacturing Processes, 30: 248–255, 2015

[18] Imran,M.; Mativenga,P.T.; & Withers,P.J.; Assessment of machining performance using

the wear map approach in micro-drilling, Int J Adv Manuf Technology (2012) 59:119–126
[19] Zheng , L.J.; Wang,C.Y.;Fu,L.Y.; Yang,L.P.;Qu,Y.P.; Song,Y.X.; Wear mechanisms of
micro-drills during dry high speed drilling of PCB, Journal of Materials Processing
Technology 212 (2012) 1989– 1997

[20] Zheng , L.J.; Wang,C.Y.; Qu,Y.P.; Song,Y.X.; Fu,L.Y.; Interaction of cemented carbide
micro-drills and printed circuit boards during micro-drilling, Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2015)
77:1305–1314

[21] Imran,M.; Mativenga,P.T.; Gholinia,A. & Withers,P.J.; Comparison of tool wear

mechanisms and surface integrity for dry and wet micro-drilling of nickel-base superalloys,
International JournalofMachineTools&Manufacture76(2014)49–60 34

[22] Lee, D.G.; Lee, H.G. ; Kim, P.J.; Bang, K.G.; Micro-drilling of alumina green bodies
with diamond grit abrasive micro-drills, International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture Volume 43, Issue 6, May 2003, Pages 551–558

[23] Chu, C.W.; Jang, J.S.C. ; Chen, H.W.; Chuang, T.L.; Enhanced wear resistance of the
Cr-based thin film coating on micro drill by doping with W–C–N, Thin Solid Films Volume
517, Issue 17, 1 July 2009, Pages 5197–5201 4th International Conference on Technological
Advances of Thin Films and Surface Coatings

[24] Giorleo, L.; Ceretti, E. ; Giardini, C.; ALD coated tools in micro drilling of Ti sheet,
CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology Volume 60, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 595–598

[25] Kao, W.H.; Su, Y.L.; Yao, S.H.; Huang, H.C.; Optimizing the tribological properties and
high-speed drilling performance of a-C:H coatings via nitrogen addition, Surface and
Coatings Technology Volume 204, Issue 8, 15 January 2010, Pages 1277–1287

[26] Yao, S.H. ; Evaluation of TiN/AlN nano-multilayer coatings on drills used for micro-
drilling, Surface and Coatings Technology Volume 197, Issues 2–3, 22 July 2005, Pages
351–357

[27] Kim,D.W.; Lee,Y.S.; Park,M.S.; Chu,C.N.; Tool life improvement by peck drilling and
thrust force monitoring during deep-micro-hole drilling of steel, International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture Volume 49, Issues 3–4, March 2009, Pages 246–255
[28] Nam,J.S.; Lee,P.; Lee,S.W.; Experimental characterization of micro-drilling process
using nano fluid minimum quantity lubrication, International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture Volume 51, Issues 7–8, July–August 2011, Pages 649–652

[29] Shi,H.;Li,H.; (2013) "Challenges and developments of micro drill bit for printed circuit
board: a review", Circuit World, Vol. 39 Iss: 2, pp.75 – 81

[30] Gong, Y.; Ehmann, K.F.; Lin, C. (2003) Analysis of dynamic characteristics of micro-
drills. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 141: 16–28.

[31] Zheng , L.J.; Wang,C.Y.; Yang,L.P.;Qu,Y.P.; Song,Y.X.; Fu,L.Y.; Characteristics of

chip formation in the micro-drilling of multi-material sheets, International Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture 52 (2012) 40–49

[32] Zheng,X.; Dong,D.; Huang,L.; Wang,X.; Chen,M.; (2013) "Investigation of tool wear
mechanism and tool geometry optimization in drilling of PCB fixture hole", Circuit World,
Vol. 39 Iss: 4, pp.195 – 203.