1

ME698B
LASER AIDED MANUFACURING

Term paper 2019

LASER BLIND POCKET MILLING

Guided by : Dr. Janakarajan Ramkumar

`

Group Members : Mayank Patel Ram Kishor Singh

18205404 18205011
 2

ABSTRACT 3

1. INTRODUCTION 4

2. LITERATURE REVIEW 5
3. EXPERIMENTATION AND MEASUREMENTS 6
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 7

5. CONCLUSIONS 9

6. FUTURE SCOPE 9

7. REFERENCES 10

LIST OF FIGURES Page no:

Fig.1.Design of blind pocket(10*10mm2 and 5*5mm2) 6

Fig.2. (a)70%,3,inner acrylic,(b)70%,3,outer acrylic(c)90%,3,inner metal 6

(d)90%,3,outer metal

Fig.3.Variation of power and passes 8

Fig.4.acrylic roughness 8

LIST OF GRAPHS

Graph.1. 8
Graph.2. 8
LIST OF TABLES

Table1.Comparision of laser 4
Table2.For metal:Titanium 7
Table3.Power variation at 10% velocity 7
Table4.Velocity variation at 90% power 7
 3

ABSTRACT:

The present work has been show to investigate blind pocket micro-milling (Raster mode) performance on
two different material titanium as a low conducting metal and acrylic as a polymer, with different
parameters, namely laser power, cutting speed and number of scan and compare experimental values with
theoretical one. The 18-W CO2 pulse laser engraving machine and 30-W fiber laser is used for the
processing of acrylic and metal respectively. In total 4 different combinations of laser power and 2
number of scan and 2 speed variation. Experimental results suggest that laser beam absorptivity, cutting
power, cutting speed and number of pass are the major influencing parameters on depth and surface
roughness.
 4

1. INTRODUCTION:

Laser milling is known as laser ablation also. This is a process for direct material removal in a layer-by-
layer fashion to make a blind slot. This technique is used frequently in the medical and electronics
industries. Pulsed lasers effectively complete this work by depositing very small, finite amounts of energy
into a material, resulting in extremely precise material removal. In ‘blind’milling the depth is not a set
parameter but a critical variable which depends upon material properties, cutting power and speed. High
absorptivity generally leads to high manufacturing throughput.[4]. The shorter the wavelength, the better
the light absorptivity for metal, so Yb-fiber laser with 1064 nm wavelength exhibit a higher throughput
than CO2 laser with a 10.6 𝜇m operating wavelength in metal processing. Conversely, polymeric
materials, which are greatly used materials in additive manufacturing, have much higher absorptivity at
10.6 𝜇m than 1064 nm, which shows the more use of CO2 lasers with polymers.

Table [1] shows the comparison of two laser.

A Comparison of CO2 laser and fiber laser

Features CO2 laser Fiber laser
Operation wavelength 9.4 & 10.6 𝜇𝑚 1.064 𝜇𝑚
Pump source Electrical discharge Laser diode
Operation mode CW & Pulse CW & Pulse
Fiber delivery Not possible Possible
Beam quality factor 3-5 0.3-4
(mm.mrad)
Pulse duration Hundreds ns-tens 𝜇𝑠 Tens ns-tens ms
Efficiency 5-20% 10-30%
Output power (CW) Up to 20 KW Up to 10 KW
Maintenance periods 2000 hrs Maintenance free (25,000 hrs)
Appilication SLA, SLM, SLS, LENS SLM, SLS, LENS
 5

2. LITERATURE REVIEW:
The investigation shown by Saklakoglu and Kasman [1] was focused on micro-milling performance of the
AISI H13 using 30-W fibr laser. Their work involved the effect of laser power, scan speed, frequency and
fill spacing on surface roughness and milling depth during multi-pass operation. The second-order
regression model was proposed to predict milling depth and surface roughness.

Snakenborg et al.[2] had reported a use of commercial CO2 laser for fabrication of micro-fluidic systems
in polymers.
 6

3. EXPERIMENTATION AND MEASUREMENTS:

3.1. Work piece materials:

In metal category titanium is used because of its low conductivity (21.9 W/ (m- K)) so laser can easily
work without conductive loss of heat. In polymer, transparent acrylic is used which has conductivity (0.2
W/ (m-K)).

3.2. Laser source:

18 W CO2 pulse laser for better machining in polymer because of light absorption has directly
proportional relation with the wavelength (10.6 𝜇𝑚)of laser[3]. 30 W fiber laser used for metal because
of light absorption has inversely proportional to the wavelength (1.07 𝜇𝑚) of incident laser.

3.3. Parameter variation:

Study of change of percentage value of power capacity(90%,70%,50%,30%) of laser and number of

pass(1,3) at a certain specific speed(10%,30%,50%) on the depth and surface roughness variation for
titanium.

3.4. Design of blind pocket:

Fig.1.design of blind pocket(10*10mm2 and 5*5mm2)

3.5.Equipments used for measurement:
3.5.1.Vernier caliper-For depth measurement
3.5.2.Optical microscope-For micro level images

Fig.2.(a)70%,3,inner acrylic,(b)70%,3,outer acrylic(c)90%,3,inner metal(d)90%,3,outer metal

As shown in fig.2.(a)inner box has very low intensity of laser and unfortunately it creates interference
pattern,In fig.2.(b)outer section blackened part effect due to end of laser operation,In fig.2.(c)side of inner
square is disrupt because of diffusion of heat,In fig.2.(d)same as effect shown in (c).
3.5.3.Mechanical Profilometer-For roughness of milled surface
 7

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

4.1 Roughness:
Table.2For metal: Titanium
Power Factor Velocity Factor Number 𝑅𝑎 (𝜇𝑚) 𝑅𝑧 (𝜇𝑚) 𝑅𝑞 (𝜇𝑚)
of scan
90% 10% 3 5.33 31.41 6.75
90% 10% 1 1.85 11.00 2.32
70% 10% 3 8.54 45.75 10.50
70% 10% 1 7.87 44.25 9.73

Normal surface cross direction on metal 𝑅𝑎 (𝜇𝑚) 𝑅𝑧 (𝜇𝑚) 𝑅𝑞 (𝜇𝑚)

0.16 1.60 0.24

Acrylic along length 𝑅𝑎 (𝜇𝑚) 𝑅𝑧 (𝜇𝑚) 𝑅𝑞 (𝜇𝑚)

0.02 0.13 0.02
4.2 Effect of parameters on Pocket depth for acrylic:
Table3.Power variation at 10% velocity:
% of Exp. 1 pass (mm) 𝟐∗𝐧∗𝛂∗𝐏 Exp. 3 pass (mm)
Pmax 𝐝 =
√𝛑 ∗ 𝐐𝐯 ∗ 𝐃 ∗ 𝐕
(18W) 1 pass E (%) 3pass E (%)
90 0.37 0.39 0.40 0.5276 36.43 1.583 59.43 0.99 1.01 0.98
0.3867 0.993
70 0.34 0.35 0.36 0.4104 17.25 1.2313 26.06 0.98 0.97 0.98
0.35 0.9767
50 0.17 0.19 0.2 0.293 56.93 0.879 59.81 0.55 0.56 0.54
0.1867 0.55
30 0.09 0.11 0.12 0.1758 64.76 0.5276 93.04 0.27 0.27 0.28
0.1067 0.2733
Where,n=number of pass,d=depth, α = absorptivity of laser beam(0.999),P=power supplied(fraction of
18W), Q v = specific energy of vaporization, 24.2J/m3,V=scan velocity(fraction of 0.00286m/s),
dexp −dthe
D=beam diameter(0.00005m),Error(E)=| |[3].
dexp
Table4.Velocity variation at 90% power:
% of Vmax 1 pass (mm) 𝟐∗𝐧∗𝛂∗𝐏 dexp −dthe
(90%Pmax) 𝐝= Error(E)=| |
√𝛑 ∗ 𝐐𝐯 ∗ 𝐃 ∗ 𝐕 dexp
10 0.37 0.39 0.40 0.5276 36.43
0.3867
30 0.20 0.22 0.23 0.1758 18.58
0.216
50 0.056 0.056 0.055 0.10562 33.926
0.1597
 8

4.3 Plots:

Graph.1.Variation of power vs depth at 10%vel. Graph.2.Variation of velocity vs depth at 90%power

4.3.1 For metals

Fig.3(a) Normal surface cross direction on metal

Fig.3(b) power 90% and 3 pass

Fig.3(c) power 90% and 1 pass

Fig. 3(c) power 70% and 3 pass

Fig.3 (d) power 70% and 1 pass

4.3.2 For Acrylic:

Fig.4(a) Acrylic along length

 9

5. CONCLUSION:

1.Light absorptivity of Acrylic is proportional to the wavelength of laser source, whereas metal has
inverse nature.

2. Results show that the increase in depth does inversely vary with cutting speed, whereas depth does
vary linearly with cutting power.

3.After processing of milling it erodes the surface quality and quality of surface directly vary with
increasing the power and quality inversely with number of pass.

4.In experiment with variation of parameter error vary from 17.25 to 93.04 depending on assumption
made in theoretical analysis like no conduction and radiation loss, homogeneous material etc.

5.Error should be min while critical point of power and velocity supplied.

6. FUTURE SCOPE:

Facing the significant variation between predicted values and experimental one is more common,so one
can try to produce some mathematical modeling and come up with a algorithm which provide more
accurate prediction of data.
 10

7. REFERENCES:

1.Investigation of micro-milling process parameters for surface roughness and milling depth. Saklakoglu
IE, Kasman S (2011) Int J Adv Manuf Technol 54:567–578

2. Microstructure fabrication with a CO2 laser system. Snakenborg D, Klank H, Kutter JP (2004) J
Micromech Microeng 14:182–189

3. Prediction of depth of cut for single-pass laser micro-milling. Chinmay K. Desai & Abdulhafiz
Shaikh. s.l. : springer, 2012, Int J Adv Manuf Technol, Vol. 60, pp. 865–882.

4. Prediction of poly-methyl-methacrylate laser milling process characteristics. Doriana M. D’Addonaa,

Silvio Gennab, Claudio Leonea, Davide Matarazzoa. s.l. : Elsevier, 2016, CIRP, Vols. 41 ,981 – 986.