Proceedings of DETC’99
17th ASME Biennial Conference on Mechanical Vibration and Noise
September 12-15, 1999, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE SUBCRITICAL
INSTABILITY IN METAL CUTTING
Tamás Kalmár-Nagy

Department of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853
Email: nagy@tam.cornell.edu
ABSTRACT
A single-degree-of-freedom dynamic cutting fixture is used
to map out a part of the lobed stability boundary in a simple
high-speed machining experiment. The experiment reveals the
hysteretic nature of the instability. A 1 DOF mechanical model
is derived using parameters identified from the experiment. We
then show the existence of a subcritical Hopf bifurcation in this
delay-differential equation model which corresponds to the ob-
served experimental instability. The calculation is based on cen-
ter manifold reduction. Then time domain simulation is used to
solve the full nonlinear equation of motion that allows for the
tool to leave the workpiece giving excellent agreement with the
experiment.
INTRODUCTION
High amplitude tool vibrations (chatter) detoriate surface
finish. These vibrations are partly due to delay effects. Because
of some external disturbances (deviations in the workpiece, jam-
ming up of chips) the tool starts a damped oscillation relative to
the workpiece thus making its surface uneven. After one revolu-
tion of the workpiece the chip thickness will vary at the tool. The
cutting force thus depends not only on the current position of the
tool and the workpiece but also on a delayed value of the dis-
placement. The length of this delay is the time-period τ of one
revolution of the workpiece. This is the so-called regenerative
effect (see, for example Moon (1994), Stépán (1989), Tlusty and

Address all correspondence to this author.
1 Copyright  1999 by ASME
DETC99/VIB-8060
Jon R. Pratt
Matthew A. Davies, Michael D. Kennedy
Manufacturing Engineering Laboratory
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
Email: jon.pratt@nist.gov
Spacek (1954), Tobias (1965)). The corresponding mathemat-
ical model is a delay-differential equation. Recently, there has
been increased interest in the subject. The PhD theses of John-
son (1996) and Fofana (1993), and the paper of Nayfeh, Chin and
Pratt (1997) presented the analysis of the Hopf bifurcation in dif-
ferent models using different methods, like the method of mul-
tiple scales, harmonic balance, Floquet Theory (see also Nayfeh
and Balachandran (1995)) and of course, numerical simulations.
Experimental results of Shi and Tobias (1984) clearly
showed the existence of ’finite amplitude instability’, that is un-
stable periodic motion of the tool around its asymptotically stable
position related to the stationary cutting. Linear stability analysis
can not account for this regime of conditional stability.
A single-degree-of-freedom active cutting fixture is em-
ployed to reveal and analyse the hysteretic nature of the lobed
stability boundary in a simple high-speed machining experiment.
Specifically, the seventh stability lobe of a defined cutting pro-
cess is mapped using experimental, analytical and computational
techniques. Then, taking width of cut as a control parameter, the
transition from stable cutting to chatter is observed experimen-
tally. The cutting stability is found to possess a substantial hys-
teresis. This behavior is predicted by applying nonlinear regener-
ative chatter theory to an empirical characterization of the cutting
force dependence on chip thickness. Simulations that incorporate
both the nonlinear cutting force and the multiple-regenerative ef-
fect due to the tool leaving the cut are shown to be in excellent
agreement with the experiments.
 Figure 2. 1 DOF MECHANICAL MODEL.

written as
Figure 1. EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS.

ẍ + 2ζωn ẋ + ω2n x = ; ∆Fx

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
A dynamic test fixture (1 DOF flexible tool holder with ac-
tuators and sensors for dynamic cutting measurements) has been
developed to explore fundamental issues in cutting process dy-
namics. Experiments were performed on a diamond turning lathe
equipped with an air-bearing spindle capable of speeds between
0 and 1500 rpm. Figure 1 shows the experimental apparatus.
The dynamic test fixture consists of a right hand cutting tool
with a triangular tungsten carbide insert (rake angle=5 , clear-
ance angle=11), held in a standard tool post mounted to a rigid
steel plate. This plate is supported at both ends by thin steel
plates thus creating a table structure having high stiffness in the
directions perpendicular to the feed direction. This structure is
rigidly mounted to the cross slide. Between the two thin plates,
two voice coil actuators are placed. The pole pieces are grounded
to the cross-slide, while the coils move with the table. Forces
can be exerted on the flexible structure by varying the current in
the coils. In this investigation they were only used to damp out
unwanted vibrations during cleaning up of the workpiece. Work-
pieces are flanged aluminium cylinders with nominal diameter of
100 mm. These are rigidly mounted to the spindle and assumed
rigid compared to the tool. The relative displacement between
the tool and the workpiece is measured by the table deflection
using an optical displacement sensor. An accelerometer is also
used to characterize tool motions.
1
(1)
m
p
where ωn = s=m is the natural frequency of the undamped free
oscillating system, and ζ = c=(2mωn ) is the so-called relative
damping factor. These parameters m s c were identified from
the machine-tool response function as follows
m = 10 kg
ωn = 578:79 1/s
s = 3:35 MN/m =) ζ = 0:0135
(2)
c = 156 kg/s
The calculation of the cutting force variation ∆Fx requires an ex-
pression of the cutting force as a function of the chip thickness f .
Evidence of nonlinear dependence of cutting force on feed can
be found as early as 1906 (Taylor). Here we measured the thrust
force component of the static cutting force as a function of feed
at a fixed cutting speed (by replacing the dynamic cutting fixture
with a three-component force dynamometer). Figure 3 shows the
results of static cutting force measurements.
The thrust force in Newtons is plotted as a function of the
feed per revolution (chip thickness) in micrometers for a ro-
tational speed of Ω = 836 rpm and a nominal width of cut
w0 = 0:25 mm. We use a simple empirical way to calculate
the cutting force by using a power-law curve fitted to data ob-
tained from the cutting tests (Taylor (1906)) as opposed to the
cubic polynomials of Hanna and Tobias (1974) and Shi and To-
bias (1984).

Fx ( f ) = 553 f 0:41 N ] (3)

MECHANICAL MODEL
Since this law is strongly material dependent, in the following
Figure 2 shows a 1 DOF mechanical model of the tool. f calculations we will use the general power law (Figure 4)
denotes chip thickness.


The corresponding Free Body Diagram (ignoring horizontal f 0
Fx ( f ) =
0
(4)
forces) is also shown in Figure 2. The equation of motion can be Kw f a f >0

2 Copyright  1999 by ASME

 as the difference of the present tool edge position x(t ) and the
delayed one x(t ; τ) in the form

∆f = f ; f0 = x(t ); x(t ; τ) = x ; xτ (6)

where the delay τ = 2π=Ω is the time period of one revolution

with Ω being the constant angular velocity of the rotating work-
piece (or τ = 60=Ω if Ω is given in rpm’s). Let us also define

∆x = ;∆ f = xτ ; x (7)

The slope of the power-law curve at the nominal chip thickness

 cutting forceα;coefficient
f0 is called the
∂Fx 
and usually denoted by
k1 (k1 = ∂ f  = αKw f0 ), see Figure 4. k1 will be used as
1
f = f0
a bifurcation parameter (it is linearly proportional to the width of
cut, which is easy to vary experimentally). Expressing ∆Fx ( f ) in
terms of k1 yields the following equation of motion
Figure 3. NONLINEAR CUTTING FORCE DEPENDENCE ON FEED.
(
∆ f  ; f0
k1 f 0
ẍ + 2ζωn ẋ + ω2n x = mα   f α 
1; ∆ f > ; f0
k1 f 0 (8)
mα f0

Let us introduce the nondimensional time t˜ and displacement xe

t˜ = ωnt xe = x
X (9)

where X is a length scale chosen below. Then the nondimen-

sional equation of motion is
8
< k1 f 0
∆x̃ 
  α 
f0
x̃00 + 2ζx̃0 + x̃ =
αmω2n X X
: k1 f 0
αmω2n X
1; 1; f 0 ∆x̃
X ∆x̃ < f0
X
(10)
where 0 denotes time derivative w.r.t the nondimensional time.
Expanding the RHS about ∆x̃ = 0 yields
Figure 4. CUTTING FORCE CHIP THICKNESS RELATION.

k1 X (α ; 1) 2 k1 X 2 (α ; 1)(α ; 2) 3 ; 
where w is the width of cut, α < 1 is the exponent and the param- ∆x̃ + ∆x̃ + ∆x̃ + O ∆x̃4
k1
mωn 2 2
2 f0 mωn 2 2
6 f0 mωn
eter K depends on further technological parameters considered to
be constant in the present analysis. When f  0 there is no con- (11)
tact between the tool and the workpiece. Let us choose X > 0 in such a way that the absolute value of the
Then cutting force variation can then be expressed as coefficients of the second and the third order terms are equal, i.e

   2 
∆Fx ( f ) = Fx ; Fx ( f0 ) =
;Fx;( f0 )  ∆ f  ; f0  k1X (α ;21)  =  k1X (α ;2 1)(2α ; 2)  (12)
Kw f a ; f0α ∆ f > ; f0
(5) 2 f0 mωn 6 f0 mωn

where f0 is the nominal chip thickness (feed) in steady state cut- This gives X = 23;f0α . Introducing the nondimensional bifurca-
ting. The chip thickness variation ∆ f can easily be expressed tion parameter p = mω k1
2 and dropping the tilde results in the full
n

3 Copyright  1999 by ASME

nondimensional equation of motion THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STABILITY
CHART
x00 + 2ζx0 + x =
The characteristic function of equation (17) can be obtained
( p(2;α) by substituting the trial solution x(t ) = c exp(λt ) into its linear
 ∆x 

2;α
3α
p(2;α) ; (13) part:
1; 1;
3
α 2;α
3α 2;α ∆x
3 ∆x < 3

D(λ p) = det(λI ; L( p); R( p)e;λτ ) = λ2 + 2ζλ +(1 + p); pe;λτ

However, ;here the definition
 of ∆x must be modified according to
∆x = min xτ ; x 2;3 α , because when the tool is not in contact
with the workpiece, the chip thickness will not be affected. The
local bifurcation study will assume that the tool does not leave
the material at any time and thus will be based on the power
series expansion of the RHS of (13) provided that x τ ; x < 2;3 α
(18)
The stability chart consists of curves on which the character-
istic equation has one pair of pure imaginary roots, while the in-
finitely many others have negative real part. To find these curves
D(iω p) = 1 + p ; ω2 ; p cosωτ + i (2ζω + p sinωτ) = 0 (19)

3p (1 ; α)  
x00 + 2ζx0 + x = p (xτ ; x)+ ( xτ ; x)2 +(xτ ; x)3 has to be solved. Eliminating the trigonometric terms from this
2 (2 ; α) equation yields
(14)
The second order equation of motion (14) is transformed into a 2 ; 2
1 ; ω2 + 4ζ2ω2
p=
dimensional system by introducing
2 (ω2 ; 1)
(20)
   
x1 (t )
x(t ) =
x2 (t )
= ẋx ((tt )) (15) which also implies ω > 1. Then

 1 ; ω2

τ= + jπ j = 1 2 : : :
and we obtain the delay-differential equation 2
arctan (21)
ω 2ζω
ẋ(t ) = L( p)x(t )+ R( p)x(t ; τ)+ f(x(t ) x(t ; τ) p) (16)

ωπ
Ω= = j = 1 2 : : :
where the dependence on the bifurcation parameter p is also em- 2π
(22)
phasized: τ ;ω2
arctan 12ζω + jπ
 
where j corresponds to the jth ’lobe’ (parameterized by ω) from
L( p) =
0 1

;(1 + p) ;2ζ the right in the stability diagram 5.
It has long been realized that productivity can be well im-
proved by exploiting the lobed nature of the stability chart, es-
  pecially at higher speeds (Tlusty and Spacek (1954)). In this
high-speed regime, the lobes are less densely packed, thus leav-
R( p) =
00
 (17) ing room for changing control parameters. However Figure 6
p0
clearly shows that linear stability does not describe the behavior
of tool oscillations correctly.
Here we show the rms amplitudes of tool vibrations when
3p (1 ; α) the rotation rate is fixed at 836 rpm, and w is swept forward and
f(x(t ) x(t ; τ) p) = 
2 (2 ; α)
backwards through wc , a plot referred to as experimental bifur-
cation diagram. Linear stability analysis predicts asymptotically
stable behavior for all widths of cut below wc =225 µm. For the
forward sweep, this is the case, however for the reverse sweep
 0
 chatter persists well below the critical value. This hysteretic be-
havior occurs in many practical machining operations, and has
(x1 (t ; τ); x1 (t ))2 +(x1 (t ; τ); x1 (t ))3 been observed by other researchers (Hanna and Tobias (1974),

4 Copyright  1999 by ASME

 Figure 5. STABILITY CHART.
Figure 6. EXPERIMENTAL BIFURCATION DIAGRAM.
Shi and Tobias (1984)). In the case shown here, the region of
the subcritical instability makes up nearly 40% of the predicted
chatter free operating regime. Within this region, disturbances,
as might be caused by deviations in the workpiece, jamming up
of chips, etc. can push the system into unstable vibrations. A
lobe of the stability boundary is traced in a series of experiments.
All cutting measurements are made at the same feedrate s = 508
µm/s. The feed per revolution f 0 thus varies with the rotational
rate, but we do not account for this in this paper. Beginning
with a small stable cut at a fixed speed, the width of cut w is in-
5 Copyright  1999 by ASME
Figure 7. EXPERIMENTAL STABILITY CHART.
creased in 25 µm increments using the manual slide in a ramp and
hold fashion. The experiment is stopped and recorded when self-
sustaining oscillations are observed in the accelerometer voltage
monitored on a digital oscilloscope. Figure 7 shows the experi-
mental stability chart as a function of speed rpm and width of cut
w mm.
Material removal can be increased between 840 rpm and 925
rpm, since w grows from approx. 200 µm to 800 µm over this
range.
To create the experimental bifurcation diagram (Figure 6)
the width of cut w is swept as for the lobe determination, ex-
cept that the ramp and hold increments are 10 µm and the out-
puts of the displacement and acceleration signals are continously
recorded. At each increment, the tool cuts for '5 seconds, these
intervals being logged on a separate channel of the scope via a
manual switch. The forward sweep is executed first, then the
part is remachined to a smooth surface, and the backward sweep
is conducted.
OPERATOR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION FORMULA-
TION
The necessary condition for the existence of periodic orbits
is that by varying the bifurcation parameter (p) the critical char-
acteristic roots cross the imaginary axis with non-zero velocity,
( p) 6= 0.
that is Re dλdp
The change of the real parts of these critical characteristic
roots can be determined via implicit differentiation of the char-
acteristic function (18) with respect to the bifurcation parameter
p to get For a heuristic argument of how these operators and bilinear form
; 2  ; 2  arise, see Kalmár-Nagy, Stépán and Moon (1999).
dλ( p)
=  pτ ω ;2 1 + 2ζ 2ω + 1 2
A first order approximation to this center manifold can be given
γ: = Re (23) by the center subspace of the associated linear problem, which is
dp p (2ζ + pτ) + 4ζτ (ω + 1)+ 4ω spanned by the real and imaginary parts of the infinite dimen-
sional complex eigenfunction s(ϑ) 2 H corresponding to the
Since this number is always positive and all the other infinitely critical characteristic root iω.
many characteristic roots but the critical ones are located in the This eigenvector satisfies
left half of the complex plane, the conditions of an infinite dimen-
sional version of the Hopf Bifurcation Theorem given in Hassard, A s(ϑ) = iωs(ϑ) (30)
Kazarinoff and Wan (1981) are satisfied. γ will later be used in
the estimation of the vibration amplitude.
i.e.
In order to study the critical infinite dimensional problem on
a 2-dimensional center manifold we need the operator differen-
tial equation representation of (17).
d
dϑ s (ϑ) = iωs(ϑ) ϑ 2 ;τ 0)
L ( p) s (0)+ R ( p) s (;τ) = iωs(0) ϑ=0
(31)
The delay-differential equation (17) can then be expressed as
an abstract evolution equation (Campbell, Bélair, Ohira, Milton
(1995), Hale (1977), Kuang (1993), Kalmár-Nagy, Stépán and which is a boundary value problem with the solution
Moon (1999)) on the Banach space H of continuously differen-
tiable functions u: ;τ 0] ! R2 s(ϑ) = ceiωϑ (32)

Similarly the adjoint eigenfunction n(σ) satisfies

ẋt = A xt + F (xt ) (24)

Here xt (ϕ) 2 H is defined by the shift of time

A
n(σ) = ;iωn(σ) (33)

xt (ϕ) = x(t + ϕ)  ϕ 2 ;τ 0] (25) which is again a boundary value problem for n(σ)

The linear operator A at the critical value of the bifurcation pa- ; dσd n (σ) = ;iωn(σ) σ 2 (0 τ]
L
( p) n (0)+ R
( p) n (τ) = ;iωn(0) σ=0
(34)
rameter assumes the form


(ϑ) ϑ 2 ;τ 0)
A u (ϑ) =
d
dϑ u that has the solution
L ( p) u (0)+ R ( p) u (;τ) ϑ=0
(26)

n(σ) = deiωσ (35)

while the nonlinear operator F can be written as


ϑ 2 ;τ 0)
The bilinear form (29) provides the ’orthonormality’ condition
F (u)(ϑ) =
0
f (u (0)  u (;τ)  p) ϑ=0
(27)
(s s
) = 1 (36)
where u 2 H .
We also define the adjoint operator A
on the space H
of con- Defining s1 = Re (s), s2 = Im (s), n1 = Re (n), n2 = Im (n), and
tinuously differentiable functions v: 0 τ] ! R 2    
c11 + ic12 d11 + id12

c=  d=
σ 2 (0 τ] c21 + ic22 d21 + id22
(37)


v (σ) =
; dσd v (σ)
L
( p) v (0)+ R
( p) v (τ) σ=0
A (28)
calculations detailed in Kalmár-Nagy, Stépán and Moon (1999)
as well as the bilinear form (  ) :H
 H ! IR defined by give

Z  
(v u) = v (0)u(0)+ v (ξ + τ)R( p)u(ξ)dξ c=
0 1


 (38)
(29) iω
;τ

6 Copyright  1999 by ASME

  ;  ; ; 
2 ω2; + 2ζ2 + ζτ (1 ;+ p) + i 2ζ+ τ 1 + p ; ω
d=δ
2
ω 4ζ τ + 2ζ ; τ 1 + p ; ω + i2ω (1 + ζτ)
2 2
δ=
4
2ω2 (1 + ζτ)2 +(2ζ + τ (1 + p ; ω2))
2 tailed calculations, the reader is referred to Kalmár-Nagy, Stépán
The solution xt (ϑ) of equation (24) can be decomposed into two
components y12 lying in the center subspace and into the infinite
dimensional component w transverse to the center subspace
xt (ϑ) = y1 (t )s1 (ϑ)+ y2 (t )s2 (ϑ)+ w(t )(ϑ)
where
y1 (t ) = (n1  xt )  y2 (t ) = (n2  xt )
With these new coordinates the operator differential equation
(24) can be transformed into a ’normal form’.

The time derivative of w can be expressed both by differentiating
the right-hand-side of equation (46) via substituting equations
(39) (43, 44) and also by calculating equation (45). Equating coeffi-
cients of like powers we obtain a 6 dimensional linear boundary
value problem for the unknown coefficients h 1  h2  h3 . For de-
(40)
and Moon (1999).
In order to restrict a third order approximation of system
(43, 44, 45) to the 2 dimensional center manifold, the second
order approximation w(y 1  y2 ) of the center manifold has to be
substituted into equations (43, 44). Then these equations will
assume the form
(41)
ẏ1 = ωy2 + a20 y21 + a11y1 y2 + a02y22 +
+a30y31 + a21y21y2 + a12y1 y22 + a03y32
(47)
ẏ2 = ;ωy1 + b20y21 + b11y1 y2 + b02 y22 +
(42) +b30y31 + b21y21y2 + b12y1 y22 + b03y32
The so-called Poincarè-Liapunov constant ∆ can be calculated as
shown in Hassard, Kazarinoff, Wan (1981) or Stépán (1989):

∆= (a20 + a02)(;a11 + b20 ; b02)+

1
ẏ1 = (n1  ẋt ) = ωy2 + d12F (43)
8ω
+(b20 + b02)(a20 ; a02 + b11)]+

ẏ2 = (n2  ẋt ) = ;ωy1 + d22 F (44)

+ 18 (3a30 + a12 + b21 + 3b03) (48)
where F= F (w + y1s1 + y2 s2 )(0)2 . Similarly

The negative/positive sign of ∆ determines if the Hopf bifurca-

ẇ = d
dt (xt ; y1s1 ; y2s2 ) = A w + F (xt ); d12Fs1 ; d22Fs2 tion is supercritical or subcritical. Despite a long and tedious
(45) calculations ∆ is quite simple:

; ; ; ; 
qδ ω2 ; 1
CENTER MANIFOLD REDUCTION AND HOPF BIFUR- ∆= 3pτ ω2 ; 1 + 2pσ 1 + 2p ; ω2 + (49)
4p2
CATION ; ; 
Although the tools for Center Manifold Reduction have been 2ζ 3 ω2 ; 1 +
 
available for a long time (Hale (1977), Hassard, Kazarinoff,
Wan (1981)) the closed form calculation regarding the existence
+2σ 2 + 7p + 6p2 +(4 + 11p) ω2 ; 2ω2 ; 4ω6
and the nature of the corresponding Hopf bifurcation in delay-
differential equations is only feasible by using computer algebra
where σ =
( ) 3p(1;α)
) and q =
2q ω2 ;1
(see also Campbell, Bélair, Ohira, Milton (1995)) (
p 4+9p;12ω4 +8ω6 2(2;α) (the coefficient of
The center manifold is tangent to the plane y 1  y2 at the ori- the nonlinear term in (14)).
gin, and it is locally invariant and attractive to the flow of system ∆ can be shown to be positive for any 0 < α < 1, that is the
(24). Its equation can be assumed in the form of the truncated Hopf bifurcation is subcritical (unstable periodic motion exists
power series around the stable steady state cutting for cutting coefficients p
which are somewhat smaller than the critical value pcr ).
The estimation of the vibration amplitude has the simple
w(y1  y2 )(ϑ) = (h1 (ϑ)y21 + 2h2(ϑ)y1 y2 + h3 (ϑ)y22 )
1
(46) form
2
7 Copyright  1999 by ASME
 and proved analytically with the help of the Center Manifold and
Hopf Bifurcation Theory. This analysis is local in the sense that it
does not account for nonlinear phenomena as the tool leaves the
material (and also, because the series expansion is local). In this
case the regenerative effect disappears, and the result of the local
analysis is not valid anymore. In this case numerical simulation
can be used and this revealed a subcritical Hopf bifurcation with
a folded structure in close agreement with the experiments.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
T. Kalmár-Nagy would like to thank Francis C. Moon, Chris
Evans and E. Clayton Teague for support through a summer re-
search appointment. J. R. Pratt thanks the National Research
Council, who have supported his research through a NRC/NIST
Postdoctoral Research Associateship.

REFERENCES
Figure 8. BIFURCATION DIAGRAM.
Campbell, S. A.; Bélair, J.; Ohira, T.; and Milton, J. 1995,
’Complex dynamics and multistability in a damped oscillator
with delayed negative feedback’, Journal of Dynamics and Dif-
ferential Equations 7, 213-236.
r r r Doi, S.; Kato, S., 1956, ’Chatter vibration of lathe tools’,
γ γpcr
r = ; ( p ; pcr ) = 1;
p Transactions of the ASME 78, 1127-1134.
(50)
∆ ∆ p cr Fofana, M., 1993, Nonlinear Dynamics of Cutting Process,
PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo.
where γ was defined in equation (23). The approximation of the Guckenheimer, J.; Holmes, P., 1986, Nonlinear Oscillations,
periodic solution of the delay-differential equation (17) can be Dynamical Systems, and Bifurcations of Vector Fields, Springer-
obtained in the form Verlag, New York.
 
cos (ωt )
x(t ) = xt (0)
y1 (t )s1 (0)+ y2(t )s2 (0) = r tions, Springer, New York.
sin (ωt )
(51)
NUMERICAL RESULTS
The results of the above sections were confirmed numeri-
cally. A Mathematica procedure was written to integrate the full
delay equation (17). To find the amplitude of the unstable limit
cycles these equations with a suitably chosen initial function (i.e.
one close to the stable manifold of the limit cycle) were inte-
grated. The bifurcation diagram (presenting the amplitude of
the unstable limit cycle as a function of the cutting force coef-
ficient) is shown in Figure 8, together with the previously ob-
tained experimental points and analytical approximation. The
dashed line corresponds to the amplitude where the tool leaves
the workpiece.
CONCLUSIONS
The existence and nature of a Hopf bifurcation in the delay-
differential equation for self-excited tool vibration is presented
8 Copyright  1999 by ASME
Hale, J. K., 1977, Theory of Functional Differential Equa-
Hanna, N. H.; Tobias S. A., 1974, ‘A theory of nonlinear
regenerative chatter’, ASME J. Eng. Indust. 96, 247-255.
Hassard, B. D.; Kazarinoff, N. D.; Wan, Y. H., 1981 The-
ory and Applications of Hopf Bifurcations, London Mathemati-
cal Society Lecture Note Series 41, Cambridge.
Johnson, M. A., 1996, Nonlinear differential equations with
delay as models for vibrations in the machining of metals, PhD
Thesis, Cornell University.
Kalmár-Nagy, T.; Stépán, G.; Moon, F. C., 1999, ’Subcrit-
ical Hopf bifurcation in the delay equation model for machine
tool vibrations’, To appear in Nonlinear Dynamics.
Kuang, Y., 1993, Delay Differential Equations, Academic
Press, Boston.
Moon, F. C., 1994, ’Chaotic dynamics and fractals in ma-
terial removing processes’, in Nonlinearity and Chaos in Engi-
neering Dynamics (Thompson, J. M. T., and Bishop, S. R., eds.),
pp. 25-37, Wiley, Chichester.
Nayfeh, A. H.; Balachandran, B., 1995, Applied Nonlinear
Dynamics Wiley, New York.
Nayfeh, A. H.; Chin, C.-M.; Pratt, J., 1997, ’Applications
of perturbation methods to tool chatter dynamics’, in Nonlinear
Dynamics of Material Processing and Manufacturing (Ed.: F. C.
Moon) 193-213, Wiley, New York.
Pratt, J. R.; Davies, M. A.; Kennedy, M. D.; Kalmár-Nagy,
T., 1999, ’Predictive modeling of nonlinear regenerative chat-
ter via measurement, analysis and simulation’, Submitted to
IMECE’99.
Shi, H. M.; Tobias, S. A., 1984, ‘Theory of finite amplitude
machine tool instability’, Int. J. of Machine Tool Design and Re-
search 24, 45-69.
Stépán, G., 1989, Retarded Dynamical Systems, Longman,
London.
Stépán, G., 1997, ‘Delay-differential equation models for
machine tool chatter’, in Nonlinear Dynamics of Material Pro-
cessing and Manufacturing (Ed.: F. C. Moon) 165-192, Wiley,
New York.
Stépán, G.; T. Kalmár-Nagy, 1997, ’Nonlinear regenerative
machine tool vibrations’, in Proceedings of the 1997 ASME De-
sign Engineering Technical Conferences, 16th ASME Biennial
Conference on Mechanical Vibration and Noise (Sacramento,
1997), DETC97/VIB-4021, 1-11.
Taylor, F. W., 1906, ’On the art of cutting metals’, American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York.
Tlusty, J.; Spacek, L., 1954, Self-Excited Vibrations on Ma-
chine Tools (in Czech), Nakl CSAV, Prague.
Tobias, S. A., 1965, Machine Tool Vibrations, Blackie, Lon-
don.

9 Copyright  1999 by ASME