grindability of cast ti–cu alloys

7
Grindability of cast Ti – Cu alloys Masafumi Kikuchi a, * , Yukyo Takada a , Seigo Kiyosue b , Masanobu Yoda c , Margaret Woldu d , Zhuo Cai d , Osamu Okuno a , Toru Okabe d a Division of Dental Biomaterials, Department of Oral Rehabilitation and Materials Science, Graduate School of Dentistry, Tohoku University, 4-1 Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8575, Japan b Department of Orthodontics, Fukuoka Dental College, 2-15-1 Tamura Hayara-ku, Fukuoka 814-0193, Japan c Division of Fixed Prosthodontics, Department of Oral Rehabilitation and Materials Science, Graduate School of Dentistry, Tohoku University, 4-1 Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8575, Japan d Department of Biomaterials Science, Baylor College of Dentistry, Texas A&M University System Health Science Center, 3302 Gaston Ave., Dallas, TX 75246, USA Received 16 January 2001; revised 25 March 2002; accepted 11 July 2002 Abstract Objectives. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the grindability of a series of cast Ti – Cu alloys in order to develop a titanium alloy with better grindability than commercially pure titanium (CP Ti), which is considered to be one of the most difficult metals to machine. Methods. Experimental Ti – Cu alloys (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0, and 10.0 mass% Cu) were made in an argon-arc melting furnace. Each alloy was cast into a magnesia mold using a centrifugal casting machine. Cast alloy slabs (3.5 mm £ 8.5 mm £ 30.5 mm), from which the hardened surface layer (250 mm) was removed, were ground using a SiC abrasive wheel on an electric handpiece at four circumferential speeds (500, 750, 1000, or 1250 m/min) at 0.98 N (100 gf). Grindability was evaluated by measuring the amount of metal volume removed after grinding for 1 min. Data were compared to those for CP Ti and Ti–6Al–4V. Results. For all speeds, Ti–10% Cu alloy exhibited the highest grindability. For the Ti–Cu alloys with a Cu content of 2% or less, the highest grindability corresponded to an intermediate speed. It was observed that the grindability increased with an increase in the Cu concentration compared to CP Ti, particularly for the 5 or 10% Cu alloys at a circumferential speed of 1000 m/min or above. Significance. By alloying with copper, the cast titanium exhibited better grindability at high speed. The continuous precipitation of Ti 2 Cu among the a-matrix grains made this material less ductile and facilitated more effective grinding because small broken segments more readily formed. q 2003 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved Keywords: Titanium alloys; Grindability; Grinding 1. Introduction Titanium is an attractive metal for dental applications because of its combination of excellent biocompatibility, corrosion resistance and mechanical properties [1,2]. However, there are some characteristics of this metal that need to be counteracted in order for this metal to become a viable choice for dental use. Among these characteristics is the difficulty of grinding or machining titanium [3–6]. Thus, it is important for practical application to develop titanium metals that are easy to cut and grind. The ability of a material to be machined has been termed its ‘machinability.’ [7]. A material has good machinability if the tool wear is low, the tool life is long, the cutting forces are low, the chips are well formed and break into small ringlets instead of long snarls, and the surface finish is acceptable. Thus, machinability is often defined based on the machining operational character- istics. On the other hand, some define machinability in terms of the material to be machined, as the relative ease or difficulty of removing material when transforming a raw material into a finished product. Since the present experiment did not involve machining but was more similar to grinding using a wheel in which abrasive particles are embedded, the word ‘grindability’ will be 0109-5641/03/$ 30.00+0.00 q 2003 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved PII: S0109-5641(02)00080-5 Dental Materials 19 (2003) 375–381 www.elsevier.com/locate/dental * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ 81-22-717-8317; fax: þ81-22-717-8319. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Kikuchi).

Upload: masafumi-kikuchi

Post on 13-Sep-2016

218 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Grindability of cast Ti–Cu alloys

Grindability of cast Ti–Cu alloys

Masafumi Kikuchia,*, Yukyo Takadaa, Seigo Kiyosueb, Masanobu Yodac, Margaret Woldud,Zhuo Caid, Osamu Okunoa, Toru Okabed

aDivision of Dental Biomaterials, Department of Oral Rehabilitation and Materials Science, Graduate School of Dentistry, Tohoku University, 4-1

Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8575, JapanbDepartment of Orthodontics, Fukuoka Dental College, 2-15-1 Tamura Hayara-ku, Fukuoka 814-0193, Japan

cDivision of Fixed Prosthodontics, Department of Oral Rehabilitation and Materials Science, Graduate School of Dentistry, Tohoku University, 4-1

Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8575, JapandDepartment of Biomaterials Science, Baylor College of Dentistry, Texas A&M University System Health Science Center, 3302 Gaston Ave., Dallas,

TX 75246, USA

Received 16 January 2001; revised 25 March 2002; accepted 11 July 2002

Abstract

Objectives. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the grindability of a series of cast Ti–Cu alloys in order to develop a titanium

alloy with better grindability than commercially pure titanium (CP Ti), which is considered to be one of the most difficult metals to machine.

Methods. Experimental Ti–Cu alloys (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0, and 10.0 mass% Cu) were made in an argon-arc melting furnace. Each alloy was

cast into a magnesia mold using a centrifugal casting machine. Cast alloy slabs (3.5 mm £ 8.5 mm £ 30.5 mm), from which the hardened

surface layer (250 mm) was removed, were ground using a SiC abrasive wheel on an electric handpiece at four circumferential speeds (500,

750, 1000, or 1250 m/min) at 0.98 N (100 gf). Grindability was evaluated by measuring the amount of metal volume removed after grinding

for 1 min. Data were compared to those for CP Ti and Ti–6Al–4V.

Results. For all speeds, Ti–10% Cu alloy exhibited the highest grindability. For the Ti–Cu alloys with a Cu content of 2% or less, the

highest grindability corresponded to an intermediate speed. It was observed that the grindability increased with an increase in the Cu

concentration compared to CP Ti, particularly for the 5 or 10% Cu alloys at a circumferential speed of 1000 m/min or above.

Significance. By alloying with copper, the cast titanium exhibited better grindability at high speed. The continuous precipitation of Ti2Cu

among the a-matrix grains made this material less ductile and facilitated more effective grinding because small broken segments more

readily formed.

q 2003 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Keywords: Titanium alloys; Grindability; Grinding

1. Introduction

Titanium is an attractive metal for dental applications

because of its combination of excellent biocompatibility,

corrosion resistance and mechanical properties [1,2].

However, there are some characteristics of this metal that

need to be counteracted in order for this metal to become a

viable choice for dental use. Among these characteristics is

the difficulty of grinding or machining titanium [3–6].

Thus, it is important for practical application to develop

titanium metals that are easy to cut and grind.

The ability of a material to be machined has been

termed its ‘machinability.’ [7]. A material has good

machinability if the tool wear is low, the tool life is long,

the cutting forces are low, the chips are well formed and

break into small ringlets instead of long snarls, and the

surface finish is acceptable. Thus, machinability is often

defined based on the machining operational character-

istics. On the other hand, some define machinability in

terms of the material to be machined, as the relative ease

or difficulty of removing material when transforming a

raw material into a finished product. Since the present

experiment did not involve machining but was more

similar to grinding using a wheel in which abrasive

particles are embedded, the word ‘grindability’ will be

0109-5641/03/$ 30.00+0.00 q 2003 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

PII: S0 10 9 -5 64 1 (0 2) 00 0 80 -5

Dental Materials 19 (2003) 375–381

www.elsevier.com/locate/dental

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ81-22-717-8317; fax: þ81-22-717-8319.

E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Kikuchi).

Page 2: Grindability of cast Ti–Cu alloys

used in this article to evaluate experimental alloys by

measuring the amount of alloy ground.

Although there may be several ways to improve

grindability, one method is through alloying. Grindability

is reported to be improved if the microstructure is a two-

phase structure consisting of either a brittle or easily sheared

second phase dispersed throughout a moderately ductile

matrix [8]. There have been many studies performed on

common industrial alloys. The overall machinability of as-

rolled or annealed low-carbon steel improves with micro-

structural changes: increasing the pearlite content and with

increasing ferrite and prior-austenite grain size, which

utilizes the inherent deformation incompatibilities that exist

between the pearlite and the surrounding matrix. Machin-

ability is enhanced by the initiation, growth, and coalesc-

ence of microvoids. One noted method of improving

machinability is to add a small amount of elements, such

as sulfur, lead, and tellurium, to copper alloys and steels,

etc., to increase the brittleness of the alloy with the resultant

[9] machining mentioned above.

For titanium, free-machining pure titanium (DT2F) and

free-machining titanium alloys (DAT5F, DAT52F) have

been developed for industrial use (Daido Steel, Nagoya,

Japan) [10]. The former alloy is made from CP Ti

(equivalent to ASTM grade 2) plus both sulfur and rare

earth metals that produce globular sulfide inclusions,

whereas the latter alloys contain the above alloying elements

in the titanium with aluminum and vanadium. They claimed

a significantly improved tool life when these alloys were cut

compared to cutting CP Ti and Ti–6Al–4V. Taira et al.

performed a comparative study on the machinability of the

wrought form of free-machining titanium (DT2F) vs.

unalloyed CP Ti using dental air turbine burs [11]. The

free-machining titanium was found to possess better

machining efficiency than did CP Ti, leading to longer tool

life. Watanabe et al. investigated the machinability of cast

DT2F and compared it to that of CP Ti and Ti–6Al–4V [12].

(We are using the term machinability instead of grindability

with reference to their study since the carbide bur ‘cut’ the

metals.) Their study revealed that when carbide burs were

used, the machinability of DT2F was much better compared

to that of CP Ti or Ti–6Al–4V. On the contrary, the

grindability with diamond points for DT2F was similar to

these controls. Apparently, granular inclusions dispersed in

the matrix of DT2F were not effective at obtaining efficient

grinding. These studies indicate that alloyed titanium has the

potential to be machined more efficiently than CP Ti.

In another study, the mechanical properties of a series of

cast Ti–Cu alloys [0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0 and 10.0 mass% Cu

(hereafter, ‘mass%’ will be referred to as ‘%’)] were

evaluated in an effort to develop a dental titanium alloy with

a lower fusion temperature for easy casting [13]. By

alloying with copper, the cast titanium became stronger. An

increase in the tensile strength of more than 40% over CP

Ti, as well as an increase in yield strength, were obtained for

the 5 and 10% Cu alloy. The elongation values were

approximately 3% and 1% for the 5 and 10% Cu alloy,

respectively. As for the bulk hardness of these alloys

compared to that of CP Ti (VHN 200), the values for the 5

and 10% Cu alloys were 230 and 280, respectively.

Since the eutectoid concentration of Cu in the Ti–Cu

equilibrium phase diagram is 7% [14,15], titanium alloys

with 5 and 10% Cu are hypo- and hyper-eutectoid alloys,

respectively. As such, we found [13] that the microstructure

of the 5% Cu alloy consists of a basket-weave proeutectoid

a-Ti and the eutectoid constituent (a-Ti þ Ti2Cu) that

formed among the a-Ti. In the 10% Cu alloy, the micro-

structure consists of the multi-grain structure of the lamellar

formed eutectoid constituent that formed from the iso-

thermal decomposition of the remaining phase during

solidification within the proeutectoid Ti2Cu. In these alloys,

strength and hardness were believed to have increased due

to the inclusion of the eutectoid in the ductile a-Ti (5% Cu

alloy) or to a stronger and harder eutectoid structure with an

almost total elimination of the ductile a-Ti (10% Cu alloy).

With the reduced ductility of our experimental alloys

with higher Cu concentrations, it is hypothesized that the

ease of grinding the Ti–Cu alloys, compared to that of a-Ti,

is enhanced because they are less ductile. Another

advantage of alloying copper to titanium is that the fusion

temperature of the titanium (1670 8C) is lowered with an

increase in the amount of copper (approximately 1610 8C

for 5% Cu and 1540 8C for 10% Cu) [14], thus facilitating

the casting process. The addition of copper, which has

greater heat conductivity than titanium, may also contribute

to easier machining.

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the

grindability of a series of cast Ti–Cu alloys with a goal of

developing a titanium alloy with better machinability than

CP Ti, a metal generally considered to be difficult to machine.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Alloys examined

Ti–Cu alloys with five concentrations of copper (0.5,

1.0, 2.0, 5.0 and 10.0%) were examined. The alloy

concentrations of 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0% Cu are located within

the a-Ti region at 790 8C (the eutectoid temperature), and

the concentrations of 5.0 and 10.0% Cu correspond to the

hypoeutectoid and the hypereutectoid regions, respectively.

CP Ti (ASTM grade 2, Titanium Industries, Grand Prairie,

TX, USA) and Ti–6Al–4V (Titanium Industries) were used

as controls.

2.2. Preparation of specimens

Each Ti–Cu alloy corresponding to a desired concen-

tration was made by melting sponge titanium (99.8% or

above, Sumitomo Sitix, Amagasaki, Japan) and pieces of

pure Cu [oxygen-free copper (Cu:99.99%, O:0.0005%),

M. Kikuchi et al. / Dental Materials 19 (2003) 375–381376

Page 3: Grindability of cast Ti–Cu alloys

The Research Institute for Electric and Magnetic Materials,

Sendai, Japan] in an argon-arc melting furnace (TAM-4S,

Tachibana-Riko, Sendai, Japan) into one 30 g button.

Before melting, the furnace was evacuated to 5 £ 1023 Pa

followed by the introduction of high-purity argon gas

(99.9999% or above, Nipponsanso, Kawasaki, Japan) until

the pressure reached 50 kPa. Each alloy button was arc-

melted and cast into a magnesia mold at 200 8C (Selevest

CB, Selec, Osaka, Japan) in a centrifugal casting machine

(Ticast Super R, Selec) using the manufacturer’s suggested

casting conditions [chamber evacuated to 7 £ 1022 Pa

(5 £ 1024 Torr); argon introduced until pressure reaches

27 kPa (200 Torr); electric current: 170–230 A; melting

time: 45–55 s]. To make the castings, wax patterns

(3.5 mm £ 8.5 mm £ 30.5 mm) were each sprued, invested

and cast. A dental X-ray unit (GX 1000, Gendex, Des

Plaines, IL, USA) was used in order to check the soundness

of each cast specimen for any appreciable casting defects

using a procedure similar to that described by Watanabe

et al. [16]. Since in our previous study [13], the depth of the

hardened layer on the cast surface was at most 250 mm, a

250 mm layer was ground from all the surfaces of the

castings prior to the grinding test, producing specimens

measuring 3.0 mm £ 8.0 mm £ 30 mm.

2.3. Grinding test

A silicon carbide (SiC) wheel (703-120, Brasseler USA,

Savannah, GA, USA) (13 mm diameter, 1.5 mm thick) on

an electric dental handpiece (Upower model 501, Brasseler)

was used to grind the specimens. Each specimen was placed

on the test apparatus used in a previous study by Ohkubo

et al. [17] so that the circumferential surface of the wheel

contacted one of the side walls of the rectangular specimen

at 908. Details as to how the applied load was calibrated and

the grinding test was carried out can be found in Ohkubo

et al. [17]. By applying a force of 0.98 N (100 gf), the

specimens were ground at one of the four rotational speeds

of the wheel (500, 750, 1000 or 1250 m/min). The amount

of metal removed (mm3) during one minute was calculated

from density previously measured using Archimedes’

principle [17] and weight loss of the specimen. The

diameter of each wheel was measured before and after

grinding. Grindability was evaluated by volume of metal

removed per minute (grinding rate) and volume ratio of

metal removed compared to wheel material lost (grinding

ratio). The data (n ¼ 4 for each condition) were compared to

the data for CP Ti and Ti–6Al–4V using one-way ANOVA

and Student–Newman–Keuls at a ¼ 0.05.

2.4. SEM observation of chips, metals ground, and wheels

The surfaces of the wheels, the ground surfaces of the

metals after testing and the appearance of the chips resulting

from the metal grinding were examined using a scanning

electron microscope (SEM) (JSM-6300, JEOL, Peabody,

MA, USA) equipped with energy dispersive spectroscopy

(EDS) (Voyager, Noran Instruments, Middleton, WI, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Grinding rate and grinding ratio

The grinding rates are summarized in Fig. 1. At the

lowest rotational speed (500 m/min), the grinding rates of

all of the Ti – Cu alloys and of Ti – 6Al – 4V were

significantly higher ( p , 0.05) compared to CP Ti; note

also that the 10% Cu alloy exhibited the highest grinding

rate. At higher rotational speeds (particularly at 1250 m/

min), the grinding rates of the 5 and 10% Cu alloys were

notably higher ( p , 0.05) than for any other metals at any

of the rotational speeds. However, there was no statistical

difference in the grinding rate among the other Ti–Cu

alloys, CP Ti and Ti–6Al–4V. The grinding rate for the

10% Cu alloy at 1250 m/min was about four times as large

as that for CP Ti. Appreciable sparking accompanied

Fig. 1. Grinding rates of metals tested.

M. Kikuchi et al. / Dental Materials 19 (2003) 375–381 377

Page 4: Grindability of cast Ti–Cu alloys

grinding as the rotational speed increased, especially with

the 5 and 10% Cu alloys at 1250 m/min.

The grinding ratios are shown in Fig. 2. The grinding

ratio of the 10% Cu alloy at 1000 m/min and above was

notably higher ( p , 0.05) than it was for any other metals

and speeds. The grinding ratio for the 10% Cu alloy at

1250 m/min was almost 20 times as large as that for CP Ti.

3.2. SEM observation of metal chips and wheel surfaces

Fig. 3(a)–(e) show typical SEM micrographs (at two

different magnifications) of metal chips that resulted from

grinding at 1250 m/min for cast CP Ti, Ti–6Al–4V, and the

2, 5, and 10% Cu alloys. Although we did not quantitatively

measure the sizes of the chips, there appears to be a

difference between the size of the chips from CP Ti and

from the 5 and 10% Cu alloys. It looks as though the CP Ti

chips are coarser than any of the other metal chips, while the

Ti–Cu alloy chips are finer.

Fig. 4 shows a magnified view of coagulated particles

found in the 10% Cu alloy chips after grinding at 1250 m/

min. These particles include a mixture of spheres and other

shapes. Examination with SEM/EDS revealed that most of

these spheres mainly consist of Ti, with other spheres

containing Cu and Ti, indicating that partial melting

occurred at a microscopic level from the high-speed

grinding. Similar Ti spheres were also found in the 5% Cu

alloy ground at 1250 m/min. These spheres were not found

in chips from the other metals nor were they seen in either

the 5 or 10% Cu alloys ground at a lower speed (500 m/min).

Fig. 5 shows a typical metal chip adhering to the wheel

after grinding the 10% Cu alloy at 1250 m/min. Some of the

SiC abrasive particles embedded in the matrix of the wheel

showed wear when CP Ti was ground (Fig. 6(a)). Similar

results were found for the Ti–Cu alloys with a lower Cu

Fig. 2. Grinding ratios of metals tested.

Fig. 3. Metal chips resulting from grinding (2 magnifications): (a) CP Ti; (b) Ti–6Al–4V; (c) 2% Cu; (d) 5% Cu; (e) 10% Cu.

M. Kikuchi et al. / Dental Materials 19 (2003) 375–381378

Page 5: Grindability of cast Ti–Cu alloys

concentration. Note that in Fig. 6(b), fine powdery materials

stuck on some edges of the worn, flat-topped SiC abrasives;

a considerable amount of the powder was attached to the

SiC wheel surfaces used to grind Ti–6Al–4V at 1250 m/

min. Qualitative examination with SEM/EDS showed the

existence of Ti, Al, and V in this powder. Fig. 6(c) reveals a

number of Ti spheres attached to the surface of the wheel;

these Ti particles are similar to those described in Fig. 4.

After grinding Ti–6Al–4V or the 5 and 10% Cu alloys, the

SiC abrasive particles embedded in the matrix of the wheel

seldom wore out, in contrast to the wear occurring from

grinding CP Ti. In many cases, the metal removed during

grinding stuck on the wheel surface. This occurred more

often after grinding the Ti–Cu alloys with higher Cu

concentrations.

4. Discussion

The higher grinding rate of the 5 and 10% Cu alloys

compared to CP Ti is shown by the finer-sized metal chips. The

chips ground from the cast Ti–6Al–4V were similar in size

and appearance to the 1 or 2% Cu alloy chips. The grindability

found for cast Ti–6Al–4V was similar to that of the Ti–Cu

alloys with lower Cu concentrations. Improved grinding ratios

for the 5 and 10% Cu alloys contributed to prolonging the tool

life. It is notable that the ease of grinding these alloys seemed

to be dependent on grinding speed.

Worn-out SiC abrasive particles embedded in the matrix

of the wheel were found when CP Ti and the Ti–Cu alloys

with a lower Cu concentration were ground. What occurred

here is typical ‘galling’ or ‘seizing’, which leads to tool

breakdown when machining titanium [3]. Intense sparking

was observed, and metal spheres were found among the

chips and on the surfaces of the wheels when 5 and 10% Cu

alloys were ground at 1250 m/min. ‘Micro melting’

occurred in these alloys when ground at a high speed

because of the decrease in the fusion temperature as the Cu

concentration increased. The fusion temperature of the 10%

Cu alloy was estimated to be approximately 1540 8C, while

the melting point of Ti is 1670 8C [15].

In the steel industry, it is common to improve machin-

ability by using sulfur [18] or various heat treatments [19] to

decrease ductility. Industrial free-machining aluminum

alloys and free-machining brass generally contain from

one to two percent of low fusion point elements such as Pb,

Bi and Sn, which rarely form a solid solution with the matrix

[20]. These elements are dispersed in the metal as elements

or as a compound; they reduce the ductility of metals and

provide improved machinability by readily forming broken

chips. Industrial free-machining titanium contains both

sulfur and rare earth metals, which produce small globular

sulfide inclusions [10]. Inclusions in the matrix seem to be a

common factor contributing to better grindability.

The improved grindability of the Ti–Cu alloys can be

explained in the same way. Although copper is classified as

a b stabilizing element [21], the b phase is not retained at

room temperature. Even quenched, the b phase is not

retained until the copper concentration reaches 13% because

the eutectoid reaction in this alloy system is very active [21,

22]. It appears that the alloys with a higher Cu concentration

(5 or 10%) could be ground more readily because of their

structure in which the a-Ti/Ti2Cu lamellae formed among

the ductile a-Ti matrix grains [13]. In other words, the

continuous precipitation along grain boundaries of low

melting point Ti2Cu in the Ti–Cu alloy made this material

less ductile and facilitated more effective grinding by

readily forming small broken segments. In contrast, CP Ti

and the alloys with lower Cu concentration (#2%), which

both have mainly ductile a-Ti structures, were more difficult

to grind. The 10% Cu alloy had better grindability, but it had

greater bulk hardness than CP Ti [13]. This signifies that

the hardness values of metals do not necessarily reflect their

ease of grindability [23].

Fig. 5. Ten percent Cu alloy chips attached to SiC wheel (1250 m/min).Fig. 4. Coagulated particles found in the 10% Cu alloy chips (1250 m/min).

M. Kikuchi et al. / Dental Materials 19 (2003) 375–381 379

Page 6: Grindability of cast Ti–Cu alloys

Titanium alloyed with copper is reported to have

acceptable corrosion resistance [24,25] and biocompat-

ibility [26] for dental use. Considering that the elongation

exhibited by our experimental Ti–Cu alloys with Cu

concentrations of 5% or below was more than 3% [13],

these alloys (except for the 10% Cu alloy) are good

candidates for dental casting alloys. It should also be

noted that the properties of Ti–Cu alloys could be

improved by heat treatment [22,27]. Thus, if needed, the

ductility of an ingot can be controlled by heat treatment

before machining. Better machinability/grindability with

enough elongation may be obtained by adding more than

10% copper if necessary. The majority of the present

dental alloys were developed with dental casting in mind.

However, casting metals is not the only way to fabricate

dental appliances. The CAD/CAM method represents a

great advancement over casting technology. The Ti–Cu

alloys developed here could be good candidates for

machining by computer.

The increase in grindability for the 5 and 10% Cu alloys

may be due to the inclusion of the eutectoid lamellar

aTi/Ti2Cu, which reduces the ductility of the alloy. The

grindability of the Ti–Cu alloys with lower Cu concentrations

(Cu # 2%) was similar to that of CP Ti. At higher grinding

speeds, Ti–6Al–4V had better results than CP Ti. Caution

should be used when grinding a high Cu titanium at a high

rotational speed because of the potential for micro melting to

occur due to the lower fusion temperature of these alloys.

Acknowledgements

This study was partially funded through NIH/NIDCR

grant 11787. The authors thank Mrs Jeanne Santa Cruz for

editing the manuscript.

Fig. 6. Typical SiC wheel surface after grinding (1250 m/min): (a) CP Ti; (b) Ti–6Al–4V; (c) 10% Cu.

M. Kikuchi et al. / Dental Materials 19 (2003) 375–381380

Page 7: Grindability of cast Ti–Cu alloys

References

[1] Lautenschlager EP, Monaghan P. Titanium and titanium alloys as

dental materials. Int Dent J 1993;43(3):245–53.

[2] Okabe T, Herø H. The use of titanium in dentistry. Cells Mater 1995;

5(2):211–30.

[3] Chandler HE. Machining of reactive metals. Metals handbook, 9th ed.

Machining, vol. 16. Metals Park, OH: ASM; 1989. p. 844–57.

[4] Kahles JF, Field M, Eylon D, Froes FH. Machining of titanium alloys.

J Metals 1985;April:27–35.

[5] Ezugwu EO, Wang ZM. Titanium alloys and their machinability—a

review. J Mater Process Technol 1997;68:262–74.

[6] Miyawaki H, Taira M, Wakasa K, Yamaki M. Dental high-speed

cutting of four cast alloys. J Oral Rehab 1993;20:653–61.

[7] Dieter GE. Mechanical metallurgy, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill;

1961. p. 697–8.

[8] Finn ME. Machining of carbon and alloy steels. Metals Handbook, 9th

ed. Machining, vol. 16. Metals Park, OH: ASM; 1989. p. 666–77.

[9] ASM International Handbook Committee, Machining of copper and

copper alloys. Metals handbook, 9th ed. Machining, vol. 16. Metals

Park, OH: ASM; 1989. p. 805–19.

[10] Nakamura S. Free-machining titanium. Proceedings of the Sixth

World Conference on Titanium, France; 1988. p. 1415–20.

[11] Taira M, Ogino S, Wakasa K, Yamaki K. Studies on the dental

application of machinable titanium alloys—(1st report) machinability

of ingots. J Jpn Dent Mater 1994;13(24):128–9. in Japanese.

[12] Watanabe I, Ohkubo C, Atsuta M, Okabe T. Cutting efficiency of air-

turbine burs on cast titanium and dental casting alloys. Dent Mater

2000;16(6):420–5.

[13] Kikuchi M, Takada Y, Kiyosue S, Yoda M, Woldu M, Cai Z, Okabe

T, Okuno O. Mechanical properties and microstructures of Ti–Cu

alloys. Dent Mater 2003; 19(3): 174–181.

[14] Murray JL. The Cu–Ti system. Bull Alloy Phase Diagrams 1983;4(1):

81–95.

[15] Murray JL. In: Baker H, editor. Binary alloy phase diagrams: Cu–Ti,

alloy phase diagrams. Metals Park, OH: ASM International; 1987.

p. 180.

[16] Watanabe I, Watkins JH, Nakajima H, Atsuta M, Okabe T. Effect of

pressure difference on the quality of titanium casting. J Dent Res

1997;73(3):773–9.

[17] Ohkubo C, Watanabe I, Ford JP, Nakajima H, Hosoi T, Okabe T. The

machinability of cast titanium and Ti–6Al–4V. Biomaterials 2000;

21:421–8.

[18] Smithells CJ, 4th ed. Metals reference book, vol. 3. London:

Butterworths; 1967. p. 853–4.

[19] Guy AG. Physical metallurgy for engineers. Reading, MA: Addison-

Wesley; 1962. p. 294.

[20] Tsuji Y. Free-machining alloys. Steel—nonferrous metal, Tokyo,

Japan: Sancho Pub.; 1984. p. 215–8 (in Japanese).

[21] Jaffee RI. The physical metallurgy of titanium alloys. In: Chalmers B,

editor. Progress in metal physics, vol. 7. London: Pergamon Press;

1958. p. 65–163.

[22] Holden FC, Watts AA, Ogden HR, Jaffee RI. Heat treatment and

mechanical properties of Ti–Cu alloys. Trans AIME 1955;7(1):

117–25.

[23] Grajower R, Kurz I, Bapna MS. Cutting times and grinding rates of

various crown and bridge metals. Dent Mater 1986;2(5):187–92.

[24] Takada Y, Nakajima H, Okuno O, Okabe T. Microstructure and

corrosion behavior of binary titanium alloys with beta-stabilizing

elements. Dent Mater J 2001;20:34–52.

[25] Taira M, Moser JB, Greener EH. Studies of Ti alloys for dental

castings. Dent Mater 1989;5:45–50.

[26] Marcinak CF, Young FA, Spector M. Biocompatibility of a new Ti–

Cu dental casting alloy. J Dent Res 1980;59:472. Abstract no. 821.

[27] Bomberger HB, Hall GS, Seagle SR. Low melting hypereutectoid

titanium–copper alloys. Titanium’80, science and technology,

Warrendale, PA: Metallurgical Society of AIME; 1980. p. 1277–85.

M. Kikuchi et al. / Dental Materials 19 (2003) 375–381 381