Open Access

Investigation of burr formation and surface integrity in micro-milling of aluminum alloy LF21 slot

Chao Wu

Chao Wu

School of Mechanical Engineering, Liaoning University of TechnologyJinzhou, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Wu, Chao
, 
Weimin Li

Weimin Li

School of Mechanical Engineering, Liaoning University of TechnologyJinzhou, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Li, Weimin
, 
Zhaoqing Tang

Zhaoqing Tang

School of Mechanical Engineering, Liaoning University of TechnologyJinzhou, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Tang, Zhaoqing
, 
Shuai Feng

Shuai Feng

Yikun Power Technology (Wuxi) Co., Ltd., WuxiJiangsu Province, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Feng, Shuai
, 
Jixiang Liang

Jixiang Liang

School of Mechanical Engineering, Liaoning University of TechnologyJinzhou, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Liang, Jixiang
 and 
Jiahui Li

Jiahui Li

School of Mechanical Engineering, Liaoning University of TechnologyJinzhou, China
Search for this author on
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Li, Jiahui
  
Jun 27, 2025
Investigation of burr formation and surface integrity in micro-milling of aluminum alloy LF21 slot's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Download Cover
Article Category: Research Article
Published Online: Jun 27, 2025
Page range: 1 - 22
Received: Feb 23, 2025
Accepted: Apr 24, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/msp-2025-0012
Keywords
© 2025 Chao Wu, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Figure 1

Simulation model.
Simulation model.

Figure 2

(a) Micro-milling experimental platform diagram, (b) micro-milling cutter (bottom view), and (c) schematic diagram of the micro-milling slot.
(a) Micro-milling experimental platform diagram, (b) micro-milling cutter (bottom view), and (c) schematic diagram of the micro-milling slot.

Figure 3

(a) Illustration of the roughness measurement by 3D LSCM. (b) Schematic of burr size on both up-milling and down-milling sides. (c) Measurement of burr size in SEM image.
(a) Illustration of the roughness measurement by 3D LSCM. (b) Schematic of burr size on both up-milling and down-milling sides. (c) Measurement of burr size in SEM image.

Figure 4

Burr size and surface roughness distribution with level classification using natural tones across different experimental groups.
Burr size and surface roughness distribution with level classification using natural tones across different experimental groups.

Figure 5

Top burr and exit burr formation in FE simulation and experiment observations by SEM.
Top burr and exit burr formation in FE simulation and experiment observations by SEM.

Figure 6

(a) Diagram of four deformation zones; (b1)–(b4) Top burr formation process on the up-milling side (stages 1–4); (c1)–(c4) Top burr formation process on the down-milling side (stages 1–4); (d1)–(d4) Exit burr formation process (stages 1–4).
(a) Diagram of four deformation zones; (b1)–(b4) Top burr formation process on the up-milling side (stages 1–4); (c1)–(c4) Top burr formation process on the down-milling side (stages 1–4); (d1)–(d4) Exit burr formation process (stages 1–4).

Figure 7

(a) Top burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of top burr formation of the LF21 slot at different spindle speeds.
(a) Top burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of top burr formation of the LF21 slot at different spindle speeds.

Figure 8

(a) Exit burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of exit burr formation of LF21 slot at different spindle speeds.
(a) Exit burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of exit burr formation of LF21 slot at different spindle speeds.

Figure 9

(a) Top burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of top burr formation of LF21 slot at different feed rates.
(a) Top burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of top burr formation of LF21 slot at different feed rates.

Figure 10

(a) Exit burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of exit burr formation of LF21 slot at difierent feed rates.
(a) Exit burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of exit burr formation of LF21 slot at difierent feed rates.

Figure 11

(a) Top burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of top bur formation of LF21 slot at different depth of cut.
(a) Top burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of top bur formation of LF21 slot at different depth of cut.

Figure 12

(a) Exit burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of exit bur formation of LF21 slot at different depth of cut.
(a) Exit burr size measurement results; (b1)–(b5) SEM images of exit bur formation of LF21 slot at different depth of cut.

Figure 13

(a) Surface roughness R a measurement results; (b1)–(b5) Surface micromorphology and 3D characteristics of LE21 slot at different spindle speeds.
(a) Surface roughness R a measurement results; (b1)–(b5) Surface micromorphology and 3D characteristics of LE21 slot at different spindle speeds.

Figure 14

(a) SEM images of LF21 slot bottom under spindle speeds of (a1) 6,000 rpm and (a2) 18,000 rpm; and (b) SEM-EDS mapping of LF21 slot bottom under spindle speed of 15,000 rpm.
(a) SEM images of LF21 slot bottom under spindle speeds of (a1) 6,000 rpm and (a2) 18,000 rpm; and (b) SEM-EDS mapping of LF21 slot bottom under spindle speed of 15,000 rpm.

Figure 15

(a) Surface roughness R a measurement results; (b1)–(b5) Surface micromorphology and 3D characteristics of LE21 slot at different feed rates.
(a) Surface roughness R a measurement results; (b1)–(b5) Surface micromorphology and 3D characteristics of LE21 slot at different feed rates.

Figure 16

SEM images of LF21 slot bottom under different feed rates: (a) 0.005 m/min, (b) 0.025 m/min, and (c) 0.045 m/min.
SEM images of LF21 slot bottom under different feed rates: (a) 0.005 m/min, (b) 0.025 m/min, and (c) 0.045 m/min.

Figure 17

(a) Surface roughness R a measurement results; (b1)–(b5) Surface micromorphology and 3D characteristics of LE21 slot at different depths of cut.
(a) Surface roughness R a measurement results; (b1)–(b5) Surface micromorphology and 3D characteristics of LE21 slot at different depths of cut.

Figure 18

(a) SEM images of LF21 slot bottom under depth of cut of (a1) 0.03 and (a2) 0.07 mm, and (b) SEM-EDS mapping of LF21 slot bottom under depth of cut of 0.07 mm.
(a) SEM images of LF21 slot bottom under depth of cut of (a1) 0.03 and (a2) 0.07 mm, and (b) SEM-EDS mapping of LF21 slot bottom under depth of cut of 0.07 mm.

EDS mapping of each element content under depth of cut of 0_07 mm_

Mn Fe Si Cu O Ti Mg Zn
1.04 0.36 0.16 0.12 0.56 0.03 0.03 0.04

Chemical elements of aluminum alloy LF21_

Element Si Ti Mn Fe Cu Mg
Mass% 0.60 0.1–0.2 1.0–1.6 0.7 0.2 0.05

Burr size and surface roughness R a measurement results_

No. N v f a p Up-burr Down-burr Exit-burr R a
(rpm) (m/min) (mm) (μm) (μm) (μm) (μm)
1 6,000 0.025 0.05 493.53 564.59 647.52 0.674
2 9,000 0.025 0.05 472.23 551.03 612.36 0.596
3 12,000 0.025 0.05 389.49 407.67 578.03 0.548
4 15,000 0.025 0.05 445.98 463.06 463.63 0.503
5 18,000 0.025 0.05 376.26 395.82 451.09 0.465
6 12,000 0.005 0.05 403.11 480.93 750.97 0.928
7 12,000 0.015 0.05 412.59 431.24 743.25 0.776
8 12,000 0.035 0.05 458.5 497.46 586.07 0.578
9 12,000 0.045 0.05 492.8 541.67 633.44 0.647
10 12,000 0.025 0.03 369.27 377.19 557.59 0.539
11 12,000 0.025 0.04 403.26 381.24 560.45 0.543
12 12,000 0.025 0.06 487.43 567.35 784.57 0.864
13 12,000 0.025 0.07 530.22 620.38 799.52 1.034

Workpiece material parameters_

Density (kg/m3) Yield strength (MPa) Tensile strength (MPa) Elastic modulus (MPa) Poisson’s ratio (μ)
2,740 42 97 6.86 × 104 0.25

Values of influencing factors_

No. Invariant parameters Variable parameters
1 v f = 0.025 m/min, a p = 0.05 mm n (1,000 rpm) = 6, 9, 12, 15, 18
2 n = 12,000 rpm, a p = 0.05 mm v f (m/min) = 0.005, 0.015, 0.025, 0.035, 0.045
3 n = 12,000 rpm, v f = 0.025 m/mim a p (mm) = 0.03, 0.04, 0.05, 0.06, 0.07

Simulation measurement results of burr size_

Burr type Sim. width (w/μm) Sim. length (l/μm) Sim. burr Size (L/μm) Meas. burr Size (L/μm) Error (w%)
Up-burr 243.51 388.59 458.58 493.53 7.1
Down-burr 328.61 399.13 517.01 564.59 8.4
Exit burr 145.69 789.35 802.68 750.97 6.9

EDS mapping of each element content under spindle speed of 15,000 rpm_

Mn Fe Si Cu C Ti Mg Zn
1.13 0.39 0.16 0.06 8.41 0.04 0.03 0.11

Parameters of J-C constitutive model of red copper_

A (MPa) B (MPa) n m C T melt1 (℃) T room (℃)
34.4 114.2 0.2762 0.018 0.2062 643 20
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
4 times per year
Journal Subjects:
Materials Sciences, Materials Sciences, other, Nanomaterials, Functional and Smart Materials, Materials Characterization and Properties
Journal RSS Feed