Comprehensive Review of Strategies to Mitigate Delamination and Uncut Fibers in CFRP Drilling

Article information

Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf.-Smart Tech.. 2025;3(2):173-191
Publication date (electronic) : 2025 July 1
doi : https://doi.org/10.57062/ijpem-st.2025.00157
1Department of Mechanical Engineering, UNIST, 50 UNIST-gil Eonyang-eup, Ulju-gun, Ulsan, 44919, Republic of Korea
2Institute of Advanced Composite Materials, Korea Institute of Science and Technology, 92 Chudong-ro, Bongdong-eup, Wanju-gun, Jeonbuk-do, 55324, Republic of Korea
Hyung Wook Park, hwpark@unist.ac.kr
Received 2025 April 22; Revised 2025 June 21; Accepted 2025 June 21.

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate defect mitigation strategies in advanced manufacturing, with a specific emphasis on drilling operations involving composite fiber-reinforced materials. During drilling, critical defects such as peel-up, push-out, delamination, and uncut fibers frequently can occur, adversely impacting product quality and assembly precision. Among these, uncut fibers are identified as the primary focus of this review, given their prevalence around the circumference of the hole’s bottom ply and their detrimental effects on structural integrity. While delamination and related defects are discussed as interconnected phenomena, this review prioritizes the mechanisms, causes, and suppression techniques specifically targeting uncut fiber formation. This review presents a detailed analysis of approaches including tool geometry optimization, bottom-ply support, and advanced monitoring techniques. By synthesizing recent advancements and comparative evaluations, this review aims to provide a consolidated understanding of how uncut fiber defects can be effectively minimized to improve drilling quality and manufacturing efficiency in composite material applications.

1 Introduction

Composite fiber materials have emerged as indispensable components in contemporary manufacturing due to their exceptional properties. These materials, known for their nonmetallic, nonmagnetic, and corrosion-resistant attributes, offer a unique combination of high strength, low weight, stiffness, and toughness [13]. As illustrated in Fig. 1(a), a global market report [4] highlights the sustained growth in the demand for carbon fiber materials, with statistical forecasts indicating a continued upward trajectory. Carbon fiber has become pervasive across diverse sectors, ranging from sports equipment manufacturing to high-speed automotive and aerospace industries [5,6], significantly enhancing the performance of the products in which it is incorporated. Fig. 1(b) provides a detailed breakdown of global carbon fiber usage percentages across various sectors as of 2021. For instance, carbon fiber accounts for nearly 50% of the materials used in the aerospace sector, contributing to aircraft construction. This integration reduces fuel consumption by 57% compared to traditional metal structures and improves maneuverability by reducing inertia. Consequently, industry leaders such as General Electric have leveraged composite fiber materials to develop high-performance aircraft engines and various components [7,8] Carbon fiber composite materials typically consist of a matrix of carbon fiber and epoxy, meticulously blended in specific proportions to achieve exceptional strength and mechanical properties.

Fig. 1

(a) Global demand for carbon fiber [4], (b) Global carbon fiber demand by applications in 2021 [17], and (c) Used material volume percentage in Boeing 747 and 787 [17] (Adapted from Refs. 4,17 with permission)

This epoxy matrix effectively supplements metals in various applications due to its influential properties and lightweight nature. Within carbon fiber materials, composite fiber-reinforced polymers (CFRPs) hold a prominent position, employing a series of fiber sheets. These sheets are created by grouping straight fibers into specific patterns and arranging them into single plies [9]. The strength of these plies, and consequently the composite fiber sheets and products, is enhanced by stacking multiple plies in precise orientations [1012]. A high-strength epoxy material blended with a specific hardener is employed at carefully calibrated ratios to ensure optimal adhesion between the plies. Typically, the epoxy-to-hardener ratio and volume percentage of carbon fibers are meticulously adjusted to achieve the desired properties in CFRP composites [13,14]. The orientation sequence of fiber plies plays a pivotal role in the superior mechanical strength of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites, aligning with established failure theories. These properties make composite materials highly applicable in various industrial sectors, with CFRP being the most commonly used composite material in the manufacturing of different parts and products [15].

The production of functional products or assemblies often requires several machining operations, including milling, turning, and drilling. Among these, drilling is particularly critical for creating holes necessary for attaching parts using rivets and bolts. For instance, Kong et al. [16] reported that Boeing 747 and 787 aircraft use approximately 50% composite material for their bodies and other components, as shown in Fig. 1(c). The assembly of aircraft components requires millions of connecting holes, with the Boeing 747 needing approximately 3,000,000 holes and the F-16 fighter jet requiring 240,000 holes.

Drilling operations in CFRPs depend on two fundamental machining parameters: the feed rate in the Z-direction and the rotational speed of the tool. Additionally, the geometry of the tool, including its diameter, rake angle, clearance angle, and point or cone angle, significantly influences the characteristics of the drilled surface hole. The fiber sequence angle of the plies also plays a critical role in CFRP drilling operations. The unique properties of composite materials, characterized by anisotropy and nonhomogeneity, differentiate their machining processes from those of metals [18]. However, the specific attributes of CFRPs present various challenges, including higher tool wear, fiber peel-up, push-up, uncut fibers, and delamination. These issues can lead to decreased structural strength, resulting in the rejection of up to 60% of parts during assembly. Among these problems, uncut fibers and delamination are considered the most serious forms of damage to FRP parts [19,20].

Delamination refers to the development of interlaminar fractures, which can cause the separation of neighboring composite fiber plies from the bottom ply [21,22]. Peel-up occurs when the chisel edge of the drilling tool contacts the top ply surface, causing significant fluctuations. Conversely, push-up occurs when the tool exits the bottom ply, as the continuous cutting feed force compresses the adjacent ply and suddenly loses contact with the bottom, causing fluctuations on the surface and edge of the hole [2325]. Uncut fibers and delamination often occur on the circumference of the bottom ply of the hole due to the lack of support from the last ply and fluctuations in the thrust force during the exit [26]. Push-out delamination can be effectively controlled by optimizing the machining feed rate. Implementing efficient machining strategies offers a practical means to increase throughput and tool lifespan while maintaining component quality.

In this study, we aim to comprehensively cover the significant contributions made over the past decade in the field of delamination and uncut fiber formation during the drilling of CFRP composites. The review focuses on understanding the underlying mechanisms behind these defects based on previously published research, including both experimental and modeling studies. By analyzing the root causes and influencing factors, this paper provides critical insights into the challenges and advancements related to CFRP drilling quality and damage mitigation.

The primary contribution of this study is to enhance tool performance over its service life without increasing the likelihood of push-out delamination or compromising overall quality. This advancement not only improves repeatability but also contributes to enhanced product quality and economic feasibility. Fig. 2 presents a comprehensive flowchart that elucidates the process and performance analysis associated with composite drilling. This visual representation serves as a roadmap, highlighting the key elements involved in this complex machining procedure. Emphasis is placed on critical machining parameters, the properties of FRP sheets/products, and the detailed characteristics of tool geometry.

Fig. 2

Process of composite material drilling and evaluation

Monitoring drilling operations in composite materials is a multifaceted task that involves both online and offline evaluation techniques. During online monitoring, real-time measurements of drilling thrust force and torque are captured using a dynamometer. Concurrently, machining vibrations are monitored via an accelerometer. These real-time assessments are essential for evaluating the immediate performance of the drilling process. Offline monitoring is conducted after drilling and involves detailed post-process analysis. Microscopic imaging is employed to examine the condition of the drilled holes, allowing for the evaluation of key attributes such as surface quality, delamination area, uncut fiber length, fiber distribution, and diametral error. Various magnification levels are used to accurately measure cut fiber lengths, providing critical insights into the structural integrity of the holes. Furthermore, a correlation chart is meticulously developed by integrating data from both online and offline monitoring. This chart serves as a powerful analytical tool, offering a comprehensive understanding of the drilling process. It plays a pivotal role in optimizing hole quality by revealing the relationships between real-time process parameters and post-drilling evaluation metrics.

1.1 Drilling Steps and Uncut Fibers

Jaiswal et al. [27] detail the CFRP drilling process in five phases, beginning with tool contact with the CFRP plies and subsequent rotation with an applied feed rate. In Phases 1 and 2, the chisel edge initiates cutting, generating compressive forces between the plies. Phase 3 sees the last ply deflecting under the applied force, behaving similarly to a simply supported beam, leading to increased crown height and hole irregularities. In Phase 4, the last ply reaches its critical deflection limit, splitting into two parts and generating uncut fibers. Finally, in Phase 5, the tool exits, completing the hole, but uncut fibers and delamination remain concerns. The formation of uncut fibers is influenced by load distribution along the chisel edge, creating a triangular pressure pattern that enhances fiber breakage susceptibility [28]. If fiber delamination extends beyond the drill diameter, severe defects occur [29,30]. The high cutting edge and point angle at the tool’s outer corner direct cutting power toward delaminating fibers, producing a uniform distribution of uncut fibers [31]. This fracture mode, termed “crown uncut fiber-type fracture”, occurs as strains at the chisel edge exceed the material’s breakage strain [32]. Understanding these intricate mechanics is crucial for minimizing delamination and optimizing drilling parameters in CFRP, which is widely used in the aerospace and automotive industries. This study highlights the importance of process parameter optimization, advanced monitoring techniques, and manufacturing strategies to enhance tool performance, improve product quality, and reduce defects, ultimately advancing composite drilling technology.

2 Impact of Ply Sequence on Drilling Operations

The precise drilling of CFRP remains challenging due to its anisotropic and heterogeneous fiber structure, which makes the material sensitive to machining-induced damage such as delamination, uncut fibers, and burr formation [33]. To overcome these challenges, researchers have investigated both conventional and nontraditional machining methods, including water jet machining (WJM), abrasive water jet machining (AJM), and electric discharge machining (EDM) [3436]. However, while these methods can reduce certain thermal and mechanical stresses, they often introduce other forms of damage, particularly in aerospace applications where high dimensional accuracy is critical [3739]. CFRP drilling defects, including uncut fibers and burrs, are highly dependent on machining parameters, fiber ply orientation, and tool geometry [40]. For instance, Wang et al. [41] observed that fiber overhang beyond the machined edge toward the chisel tip is heavily affected by fiber direction, leading to variations in uncut fiber length and spatial distribution [42,43].

Fig. 4 presents the relative orientation between fiber sequence and spindle rotation direction, which determines the critical cutting angle (Ø). This angle dynamically changes during drilling because the tool rotates while the fiber orientation remains fixed, directly impacting the mechanism of fiber separation and uncut fiber formation [43,44].

Fig. 4

Fiber sequence and tool spindle rotation direction

Figs. 5(a) shows the critical cutting zone where uncut fibers typically form, while 5(b) provides a comparative experimental image confirming the defect accumulation in those regions. When the cutting angle lies between 90°–180° or 270°–360°, the fiber orientation tends to resist the tool’s movement, thereby increasing the probability of uncut fibers [45,46]. Su et al. [47] further emphasized that initial fiber orientation has a pronounced effect on both uncut fiber distribution and delamination. Specifically, fiber orientations in the range of 30°–60° result in reduced uncut fiber formation and smoother slot edges. These findings highlight the critical role of ply sequence in determining machining outcomes. To mitigate these issues, researchers have explored customized drilling techniques and tool path strategies, as summarized in Table 1. These studies employed a variety of ply orientations, tool geometries, and cutting parameters to minimize defects. The diversity in outcomes emphasizes the need for tailored drilling strategies based on specific CFRP layup designs. Moreover, integrating numerical models that predict delamination, burr formation, and uncut fiber length particularly those incorporating ply-by-ply mechanical behavior would significantly enhance our predictive capabilities. A more comprehensive review of such modeling frameworks is warranted to fully understand and control defect mechanisms in CFRP machining.

Fig. 5

(a) Critical cutting zone for generating the uncut fiber [7] and (b) Comparative experimental image of the uncut fiber zone (Adapted from Ref. 7 with permission)

Different CFRP drilling and fiber ply sequences

3 Tool Geometry Optimization

Achieving a smooth, defect-free hole in CFRP material is highly dependent on the geometry of the drilling tool, which is a crucial parameter in the drilling process. Researchers have investigated various tool geometries to minimize common drilling defects, such as uncut fibers and delamination. The geometry of the tool directly influences key factors, including feed force, temperature at the tool-chip interface, and drilling accuracy. Moreover, an optimized tool structure not only helps prevent delamination but also reduces tool wear, thus extending the tool’s lifespan [53]. Unlike conventional drilling tools, modified geometric drill bits have been studied to enhance performance. Tool geometry modifications typically involve adjustments to parameters such as the rake angle, helix angle, point angle, and clearance angle [54,55]. Fig. 6 illustrates various modified tool geometries that have been employed in recent studies to improve drilling precision and minimize defects. These tools are often constructed from durable metal materials and may be coated with specialized substances to enhance their mechanical properties. Common coatings include diamond, tungsten, and cemented carbide, all of which significantly improve tool strength and durability while reducing uncut fibers and delamination [56,57].

Fig. 6

Optimized drill geometry (a) Twisted drill, (b) One-shot drill, (c) Double point angle drill, (d) Brad point drill, (e) Step drill, and (f) Diamond core drill

Fig. 6(a) presents a conventional two-flute twist drill bit, commonly used in CFRP drilling. The tool lip, or flute edge, is designed to create a sloping cutting surface [58]. The web, situated between the two flutes, is relief-ground at an angle of 59°, typically ranging between 118° to 120° to form a point. However, due to limited space for debris evacuation and a lower surface speed at the point, conventional twist drills are less effective and often cause delamination and uncut fibers at the drill exit [59,60]. To mitigate these issues, drill bits can be coated with diamond, tungsten, or cemented carbide to improve tool durability and cutting efficiency. Fig. 6(b) depicts the one-shot drill bit, designed with multiple cutting edges specifically for CFRP drilling. This design effectively reduces thrust force, uncut fibers, and delamination while improving hole quality [61]. Additionally, tool wear can be assessed by examining the development of cutting-edge roundness, sharpness loss, and secondary cutting-edge dullness [62,63]. Fig. 6(c) shows a modified double-point angle drill, a variation of the conventional twist drill bit. This tool features two-point angles instead of one, improving mechanical properties while maintaining economic feasibility. The maximum drilling temperature generated by this tool increases with spindle speed and decreases with feed rate [64,65].

The brad point drill bit, shown in Fig. 6(d), features a uniquely pointed tip that allows for precise cutting while minimizing delamination, resulting in defect-free holes. The specially designed flutes and brad point tip facilitate efficient chip evacuation and help prevent drill bit wandering [66]. This geometry includes four cutting edges with three-pointed cone angles: two inward cutting edges, two outward cutting edges, and one inner drill tip, along with two outer drill tips. The rake and clearance angles further contribute to its enhanced cutting performance [67,68]. An experimental study by Grilo et al. [69] demonstrated that the brad point drill bit outperforms both twist and one-shot drill bits by minimizing delamination, uncut fibers, and peel-up effects during CFRP drilling. Fig. 6(e) illustrates a step drill bit, which combines the characteristics of a twist drill with a two-step cutting mechanism. As pressure is applied, the hole diameter gradually increases, reducing cutting force and torque while improving the stage ratio [70]. Studies have shown that step drill bits, especially at low feed rates, produce lower delamination factors and thrust forces compared to conventional twist drills [71,72]. Fig. 6(f) shows diamond core drill bits, which are used in CFRP drilling through grinding processes. A hybrid machining technique known as rotary ultrasonic machining, which combines ultrasonic and diamond grinding methods, is employed for material removal. However, chip evacuation remains a challenge when using diamond core drills [73]. The use of core-step drills has improved chip evacuation, though drill lifespan varies, and chip entrapment can occur at lower spindle speeds [7476].

The oblique breaking mechanism has demonstrated a significant reduction in cutting torque and forces [76]. Additionally, diamond core drill bits can minimize delamination at the hole exit and enhance surface quality [77]. To further reduce uncut fiber and delamination, brad-spur and dagger drill bits have been explored, with the dagger drill proving particularly effective in lowering thrust force and damage, making it suitable for initiating reaming in CFRP drilling [78,79]. These tool geometry modifications highlight the ongoing efforts to improve CFRP drilling processes by optimizing tool selection based on specific drilling objectives.

3.1 Modification of Tool Geometry

Researchers have investigated various modifications to conventional drilling tools due to their limitations in producing error-free and precise holes. These modifications primarily target the side cutting edge, chisel edge, and overall tool geometry. Fig. 7 provides an overview of recently developed modified drilling tools derived from conventional designs. Notably, modifications to the side edge and sharp chisel edge have shown promising results. However, experimental results indicate that some residual uncut fiber may persist [80]. To achieve multiple cuts with specific angles and distances along the cutting edge, fracture-inducing cuts have been introduced. This technique effectively reduces heat generation at the tool-chip interface, enhances chip evacuation, lowers power consumption, and improves cutting efficiency [81]. Additionally, incorporating secondary cutting-edge grooves creates a multi-groove drill bit that reduces feed force (push force) during drilling. The groove design significantly influences the cutting mechanism and direction of the drill bit [82].

Fig. 7

Modified tool geometry [63,8084] (Adapted from Refs. 63,8084 with permission)

The introduction of staged grooves enables more efficient drilling by reducing thrust force. Compared to conventional drill bits, multi-geometry groove drilling tool bits provide enhanced drilling performance due to their ability to facilitate step drilling mechanisms [83]. The second-stage design of multi-geometry grooves gradually increases in width from the starting position, allowing for controlled depth of cut [15,16,83]. Experimental results from Jia et al. [84] confirm that multi-geometry grooves effectively reduce delamination in CFRP drilling, as well as uncut fiber and exit burrs in stacked Ti/CFRP materials. The formation of burrs depends on material properties; for example, titanium produces segmented chips [85], while CFRP contains carbon microparticles. Furthermore, the multi-margin construction of drill bits ensures that hole sizes remain within tolerance limits. Compared to conventional step drill bits, multi-geometry groove modifications have demonstrated a fourfold improvement in the number of high-quality holes produced. These advancements underscore the commitment of researchers to refining tool geometries for CFRP drilling, ultimately enhancing efficiency and reducing errors in hole creation.

4 Analytical Analysis of the Uncut Fiber

In the production of CFRP sheets, multiple groups of carbon fiber threads form plies with specific ply sequences. Achieving a smooth and efficiently drilled hole depends heavily on tool geometry and machining parameters. If these parameters are not optimized, errors such as uncut fiber and delamination may appear, often due to inadequate bottom-ply support [86]. Even with optimized parameters, these issues can persist. When the drilling tool engages the bottom ply of the CFRP sheet, different theories explain the cutting phenomena. Phadnis et al. [87] utilized the Hashin and Puck failure criteria to analyze the cutting failure of unidirectional CFRP sheets. They used Puck’s failure model to describe matrix failure and Hashin’s model for overall failure estimation. The general-purpose finite element program Abaqus/Explicit was employed to simulate hole creation, incorporating these failure models with user-defined material properties. Fig. 3, Phase 3, illustrates the tool’s penetration through the bottom ply.

Fig. 3

CFRP drilling with delamination and uncut fiber [27]; CFRP hole mechanism of the last ply (a) Line diagram of point load through wedge angle, (b) Deflection of last ply, (c) Maximum deflection, (d) Break of the last ply, and (e) Final shape of the last ply with error (Adapted from Ref. 27 with permission)

For failure of the carbon fiber (Hashin’s criteria)

(1) σ112(1s112+1s122+1s132)

For failure of the epoxy in the matrix (Puck’s criteria),

(2) {(σ112x1t)2+σ222|x2tx2c|+(σ12s12)2}+(σ22x2t+σ22xzc)

Where, σ11, σ22, σ13 represent stress tensors, and s11, s12, s13, x1t, x2t, x2c denote shear, tensile, and compressive failure parameters in different planes.

In a study conducted by Xu et al. [88], the cutting of the final ply in a fiber bundle was analyzed after bonding, requiring an analytical approach based on bending moment theory. The researchers derived an equation for a single fiber within the contact region between the tool and the workpiece. This deflected fiber was segmented into three distinct zones for detailed analysis. The first zone begins above contact point A in the tool–fiber region, as illustrated in Fig. 8. The second zone spans from point A to point E, while the third zone lies below point E. The lengths of the three contact zones were calculated using the expressions z < acre, zac+ h − Δt and z > ac + h − Δt, respectively. The study further evaluated the cutting behavior with and without tool tip vibration during the drilling of unidirectional FRP. The results demonstrated that introducing tool vibration significantly reduces cutting forces, minimizes fiber deflection, and promotes cleaner fiber fracture near the tool–fiber contact zone.

Fig. 8

Mechanism of the tool and workpiece contact area and its cutting phenomenon [27,88] (Adapted from Ref. 27 with permission)

Su et al. [47] conducted milling experiments, while Jaiswal et al. [27] focused on drilling. Both studies identified uncut fiber forming in the critical cutting angle region. To define these regions, an analytical equation was established for two cutting scenarios: (i) 0 < Ø ≤ + π/2 and (ii) γ0+ π/2 < Ø, where Ø represents the fiber orientation angle and γ0 denotes the tool rake angle. The analysis of this cutting model is based on the behavior of a single fiber, specifically the deflection, bending, and cutting that occur in the last ply before the fiber is cut. The deflection of each fiber element during contact comprises two portions. The first portion involves initial fracture, whereas the expanded crack, as depicted in Fig. 8, represents hogging of one tool edge and sagging of the opposite side, resembling a cantilever beam. The fiber deflection model assumes an initial fracture followed by crack expansion, resembling a cantilever beam. The critical uncut fiber angle is calculated using Eqs. (3) and (4) [27], which are derived based on the bending moment experienced by the fiber.

(3) Φt1=σIfλ12rf((2(a-L1)-λ12Δδ2+2aoλ12Δδ+2)2+(aoλ1cos(λ1L2)-sin(λ1L2)aoλ1sin(λ1Δδ)+cos(λ1Δδ2))2)for the region   {0<γ0+π/2}Φt2=σIf2rf((λ1TX=ΔδSX=L1)2+(A)2)   for the region {γ0+π/2<}

Where,

(4) A=(Δδλ1(1+e2λ1ao)cos(aoλ1)+(1-e2λ1ao)cos(aoλ1)-(1-e2λ1ao)sin(aoλ1))L2(x(1+e2λ1ao)cos(aoλ1)+2(1-e2λ1ao)cos(aoλ1)-2(1+e2λ1ao)sin(aoλ1))

In that study, various parameters and equations were considered to analyze the behavior of the CFRP composite during drilling operations. The bending stress of the fiber (σ), the Moment of Inertia (MOI) of a single fiber (If), the maximum deflection on one side (L1), the maximum deflection on the other side (L2), and the radius of the fiber (rf) are crucial factors in the analysis. In a certain area of the final ply in the FRP sheet, the uncut fibers exhibit approximately half of the maximum deflection of a single fiber. While the length of an uncut fiber cannot be precisely predicted, it is typically found to be maximum in the middle region. The calculation of the maximum length of the uncut fiber is based on the critical cutting thrust force in the critical cutting angle region.

A review of the literature identifies three primary methods for estimating the cutting thrust force responsible for delamination and uncut fibers:

  • 1) Calculation of drilling thrust force based on tool geometry and cutting direction, which is the conventional approach [33,8994].

  • 2) The elemental approach considers the drilling process as orthogonal cutting and divides the cutting zone into three distinct regions [88,9599].

  • 3) The single fiber cutting approach uses the bending moment and deflection of the fiber and beam analysis (such as supported and cantilever beams). In this approach, the deflected fiber is divided into two or three parts depending on the specific case, and the deflection limit of the fiber is integrated to obtain the results. Table 2 summarizes the latest analyses, including the methods used for analysis, deflection prediction limits, and relevant remarks [29,41,43,88,100108].

5 Analysis of the Maximum Uncut Fiber Length

Estimating the uncut fiber length in CFRP drilling poses a significant challenge due to the inherent variability in fiber properties. Even under identical machining parameters and conditions, consecutive holes often display differing lengths of uncut fiber [103,109]. Nonetheless, averaging the uncut fiber lengths across multiple holes can yield a reasonably accurate estimate, typically within a 10–15% error margin. In a study by Jaiswal et al. [27], the maximum uncut fiber length was estimated using Timoshenko’s beam deflection theory. By analyzing the influence of cutting forces, the researchers established a reliable method for predicting the maximum uncut fiber length. This estimation was expressed using Eq. (5), where l represents the deflected length of the deformed fiber, Llf denotes the length of the fiber deflected by the drill bit, Ldf represents the total deflected fiber length, and r is the radius of a single fiber.

(5) lmax=l×(LlfLdf-2)+r

5.1 Physical Characteristics of the Uncut Fiber

The formation of uncut fibers and delamination at the exit surface of CFRP composites is largely attributed to suboptimal machining methods [110,111]. Although uncut fibers typically do not compromise the mechanical performance of machined CFRP components, their removal often requires additional processing, increasing both time and cost [90,112,113]. Uncut fibers generally exhibit distinct features near the hole exit, which have been extensively studied to understand how process and technological parameters influence their characteristics [54,114,115]. These investigations have led to the development of machining techniques aimed at minimizing uncut fiber formation at the hole exit [116,117]. Experimental observations by Xu et al. [118] revealed that increasing thrust force leads to a rise in both the number and length of uncut fibers. Heisel et al. [115] demonstrated that dry machining with conventional twist drills-varying cone angles and feed rates-can reduce uncut fiber length at the hole entrance, though the exit hole geometry remained largely unchanged. Further studies by Xu et al. [119] compared one-shot, brad-spur, and conventional twist drills, concluding that feed rate was the most critical factor affecting flaw severity, with the brad-spur drill achieving the least damage. Qiu et al. [43] explored step drill tools under varying machining parameters, identifying specific conditions that effectively minimized both delamination and uncut fiber length. Their findings confirmed that careful optimization of tooling and machining parameters enables efficient CFRP drilling with minimal fiber damage.

Geier et al. [121], proposed a Digital Image Processing (DIP)-based method to directly monitor uncut fibers, enhancing understanding and enabling parameter optimization in unidirectional CFRP drilling. Among the available techniques, bottom-ply support has emerged as a simple yet effective approach to reduce burrs, delamination, and workpiece deflection. This method involves supporting the bottom side of the CFRP workpiece during drilling, either through active backup forces, passive support structures, or specially designed backing fixtures [122,123]. While bottomply support effectively limits composite laminate deflection, it does not provide continuous support throughout the entire drilling process. Consequently, this method only partially mitigates uncut fiber formation and delamination, particularly in the final phase of drilling, where material integrity becomes more vulnerable [124,125]. Despite significant research into the formation of uncut fibers and delamination, many studies lack comprehensive predictive models to fully explain the underlying mechanisms. Additionally, there remains a need for a more integrated review of numerical models aimed at simulating delamination and uncut fiber formation during CFRP drilling. While several studies have explored the influence of machining parameters on damage generation, a broader synthesis incorporating factors such as cutting forces, tool geometry, and material behavior is essential for advancing the understanding and control of these complex phenomena.

6 Estimation of Drilling Hole Quality

Achieving high-quality drilled holes in CFRP typically requires precision equipment such as computer numerical control (CNC) machines or highly accurate, vibration-free drilling setups, along with optimized tools and parameters. During drilling, the applied forces on the CFRP sheet can be measured using a dynamometer, providing real-time data on thrust and torque. Vibration levels and temperatures are commonly monitored using accelerometers or vibration sensors and thermocouples, respectively, as illustrated in the flowchart in Fig. 2. This real-time data acquisition is known as online monitoring. After drilling, hole quality is evaluated through offline monitoring. This involves capturing microscopic images of the drilled holes using digital microscopes and analyzing them with image processing techniques, custom-developed codes, or specialized software. Some studies have incorporated artificial intelligence to improve hole quality assessment and optimize process parameters [126131]. Offline monitoring is particularly valuable for evaluating defects such as delamination and uncut fibers. By integrating both online and offline monitoring methods, researchers and manufacturers can gain a comprehensive understanding of hole quality, enabling continued advancements in CFRP drilling technologies.

Digital image processing is used to analyze hole characteristics captured via microscopy. Researchers have utilized various image processing techniques, often leveraging algorithms written in programming languages such as Python, MATLAB, and C# [132,133]. The process involves several steps. First, the captured image undergoes preprocessing, where it is converted into a binary format, followed by noise reduction and reflection removal to enhance clarity. Next, the shape contour of the hole is extracted, enabling the calculation of critical parameters such as delamination, uncut fiber length, area, and orientation [134]. Finally, automated defect characterization is performed using techniques introduced by Hrechuk et al. [52], which rely on mathematical assessment and non-destructive evaluation of drilled hole images. Automated contour generation is employed to outline delamination zones and uncut fibers, with the maximum uncut fiber length at the hole exit and the area factor serving as key metrics for assessing hole quality [116,135]. Fig. 9 illustrates the image processing workflow for evaluating uncut fibers and delamination in unidirectional CFRP drilling. The input data includes the microscopic image, applied scale, actual hole diameter, and center coordinates of the hole perimeter [45]. The output consists of segmented images obtained through image linearization, mirror image elimination, delamination measurement, uncut fiber length assessment, and hole contouring [136138]. Delamination is typically observed along the outer circumference of the hole, while uncut fibers are found on the internal side, both of which are considered critical defects in CFRP drilling. The preprocessing module filters out irrelevant image regions while establishing precise contours for uncut fibers and delamination zones [139]. Contour analysis enables accurate measurement of defect distribution within the hole.

Fig. 9

Image processing for evaluating of uncut fibers and delamination [52] (Adapted from Ref. 52 with permission)

In 2D digital image processing, the quality of drilled holes is assessed by detecting circumferential errors, including delamination and uncut fiber presence. Fig. 10 illustrates the analysis of uncut fiber contours, with measurement errors represented by deviation lines. Factors such as intensity adjustment, image enhancement, brightness control, edge detection, and noise suppression play crucial roles in ensuring accurate image analysis [140142]. Due to the complex geometric variations in CFRP-drilled hole defects, optimizing image-based quality assessments remains a challenge [32,69,128,143,144]. Ongoing research aims to refine this approach for different CFRP types, correlating cutting parameters and material constraints to optimize drilling outcomes. To enhance production efficiency and avoid wastage caused by delamination defects detected during industrial assembly, researchers have focused on developing predictive models based on historical sensor data. These models correlate real-time sensor readings with predicted delamination severity [121,145].

Fig. 10

(a) hole microscopic image and circumferential profile length distribution of (b) uncut fiber and (c) delamination fiber [52] (Adapted from Ref. 52 with permission)

By establishing such a pattern, production efficiency can be improved, time wastage reduced, and delamination issues that fall outside the tolerance range minimized. This approach offers a systematic and proactive solution, as opposed to relying solely on random inspections during industrial assembly [146150]. Residual porosity in prepreg fabric plies complicates the delamination process, leading to variations in CFRP workpiece performance. Developing an adaptive model that accounts for porosity-related effects is essential for optimizing CFRP manufacturing.

7 Modification of the CFRP Drilling Process to Minimize Error

In current machining operations, particularly conventional drilling of CFRP materials, various types of errors frequently occur. Researchers have explored alternative and modified processes to minimize or eliminate these errors. Some studies have investigated the use of aluminum and titanium in combination with CFRP, which can reduce errors but may also increase material costs and weight [104,151154]. Additionally, modified drilling techniques specifically tailored for CFRP materials have been examined. For example, Rubio et al. [155] explored the reduction of drilling errors such as peel-up, push-down, delamination, and uncut fibers by coating the top and bottom plies of CFRP with epoxy. These epoxy coatings provide support to the plies, resisting the compressive forces exerted by the drilling tool on the CFRP surface. While coated plies may still incur defects during drilling, they help protect the CFRP plies, ensuring proper hole formation with minimal errors. Damage intensity and characteristics after CFRP drilling are assessed by examining the entry and exit ply features. The dual coating of the CFRP sheet on both the top and bottom plies is shown in Fig. 11(a). Additionally, Scotch tape can be applied to the top surface of the CFRP sheet to reduce top ply errors such as peel-up, as investigated by Prakash et al. [156]. Their study evaluated the effect of varying Scotch tape ply counts on thrust force and torque, noting that these parameters did not exhibit significant fluctuations, as shown in Fig. 11(b). Changes in the number of Scotch tape plies had minimal impact on thrust force and torque.

Fig. 11

(a) CFRP drilling coating with epoxy ply top and bottom ply [155], (b) the top ply coated with the number of scotch tape [156], (c) CFRP drilling with the attachment of a damper [158], and (d) CFRP drilling with bottom ply supported through wet tissue and ice ply in cryogenic conditions with ultrasonic vibration [51]

Thrust force plays a critical role in CFRP drilling, as it can contribute to drilling errors. When the chisel edge of the drilling tool interacts with the first top ply surface of the CFRP, a substantial force is applied to the workpiece surface. This thrust force can lead to errors such as peel-up, push-down, delamination, and uncut fibers [157]. Wang et al. [158] conducted an experimental study to mitigate the impact of thrust force by using dampers. Four effective dampers were placed beneath the CFRP drilling jig, as shown in Fig. 11(c), to absorb the impact force and stabilize the forces, thereby reducing or eliminating errors in CFRP drilling. Park et al. [51] investigated methods to minimize or eliminate CFRP delamination and uncut fibers by providing temporary bottom support. Their experimental study employed four different setups involving water, ice, wet tissue, and liquid nitrogen, combined with ultrasonic vibration (U/V) CFRP drilling. The setups were as follows: (i) U/V and liquid nitrogen, (ii) wet tissue and liquid nitrogen, (iii) wet tissue, liquid nitrogen, and U/V, and (iv) wet tissue, liquid nitrogen, U/V, and bottom ply support via an ice plate. The results showed that the fourth combination yielded the best outcomes, as shown in Fig. 11(d). This setup involved creating a backup ice ply at the base of the CFRP sheet, followed by U/V treatment to remove uncut fibers. By facilitating bottom support with ice ply and wet tissue, the freezing time of the water was reduced. This fourth combination successfully eliminated all uncut fibers. In CFRP drilling, using different metals, wet tissue, and liquid nitrogen to create a bottom ply supported by ice inside and beneath the drilled hole generates opposing forces against the cutting and thrust forces, allowing for the removal of uncut fibers over the cutting edge. Components at the specimen’s base, instead of using the hybrid cryogenic deburring approach, could be highly beneficial [159,160].

However, when the surface of the CFRP specimen is irregular, it becomes challenging to create a backup ply plate using materials such as aluminum, titanium, steel, or others [127,161165]. Nevertheless, creating a bottom ply support through the rapid solidification of water to form an ice ply in the hybrid liquid nitrogen deburring process has proven effective. The ice ply on the exit surface generates a reaction force that counteracts the thrust force [119]. The ability to deburr uncut fibers, resulting in a thin, curved, or intricate shape, offers significant advantages in drilling operations.

8 Conclusion

The growing adoption of CFRP materials across diverse industries is largely attributed to their exceptional strength-to-weight ratio and superior mechanical properties. However, machining CFRP-particularly drilling-remains a significant challenge due to common defects such as uncut fibers, delamination, and burr formation. To mitigate these issues, researchers have proposed several effective strategies. Optimizing machining parameters, including cutting speed, feed rate, and tool geometry, has been shown to significantly reduce uncut fiber formation and enhance hole quality. Specialized drill bits designed specifically for CFRP applications have also proven effective in minimizing uncut fiber defects, although they may require customization based on fiber orientation and stacking sequence. Another approach involves bonding CFRP sheets to a rigid metal substrate during drilling, which stabilizes the material, reduces fiber pull-out, and improves dimensional accuracy. Temporary bottom-ply support methods-such as using ice, wet tissue, or liquid nitrogen-have been employed to counteract thrust forces and reduce uncut fiber formation. Additionally, incorporating dampers beneath the drilling setup helps absorb impact forces and maintain stable cutting conditions. Advanced digital image processing techniques are increasingly used for post-process evaluation, offering detailed insights into defect formation and enabling further process optimization. While these developments have significantly improved the understanding and control of CFRP drilling, ongoing research is essential to enhance efficiency, minimize defects, and develop scalable, cost-effective solutions for broader industrial implementation.

Notes

Acknowledgement(s)

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Ministry of Science (No. NRF-2022R1A2C3007963) and this work was supported by the Industrial Technology Alchemist Project (No. 20025702) funded by the Ministry of Trade, Industrial and Energy (MOTIE, Korea).

Data availability

This review paper does not involve original data collection. The conclusions are based on publicly available data and prior research, all of which are properly cited in the manuscript.

Ethics approval

This study did not require ethical approval, as it did not involve human or animal subjects.

Consent to participate

Not applicable as the study did not involve human participants.

Consent for publication

The author grants consent for the publication of this paper.

References

1. Zhu M., Ouyang J., Tian Y., Guo W., Zhang Z., Mativenga P., Li L.. 2024;Understanding factors affecting the process efficiency, quality and carbon emission in laser drilling of CFRP composite via tailored sequence multiple-ring scanning. Composites Part B: Engineering :111156.
2. Qiao Y., Chen T., Ma H., Liu Y., Tang A., Xiong W., Deng L.. 2023;Experimental study on the sidewall quality of femtosecond laser drilling CFRP. Composites Part B: Engineering :110972.
3. Chandramohan N. K.. 2020;Variation in compressive and flexural strength of the carbon epoxy composites with the addition of various fillers to the epoxy resin. Materials Today: Proceedings :643–647.
4. Sauer M., Schüppel D.. 2022;Composites market report - 2021 the global market for carbon fibers and carbon composites. Composites United eV: Berlin, Germany
5. Geng D., Liu Y., Shao Z., Lu Z., Cai J., Li X., Jiang X., Zhang D.. 2019;Delamination formation, evaluation and suppression during drilling of composite laminates: A review. Composite Structures 216:168–186.
6. Shahabaz S. M., Shetty N., Shetty S. D., Sharma S. S.. 2020;Surface roughness analysis in the drilling of carbon fiber/epoxy composite laminates using hybrid taguchi-response experimental design. Materials Research Express 7(1):015322.
7. Geier N., Szalay T., Takács M.. 2019;Analysis of thrust force and characteristics of uncut fibres at non-conventional oriented drilling of unidirectional carbon fibre-reinforced plastic (UD-CFRP) composite laminates. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 100:3139–3154.
8. Singh H., Singh T.. 2019. Effect of fillers of various sizes on mechanical characterization of natural fiber polymer hybrid composites: A review. In : Materials Today: Proceedings. p. 5345–5350.
9. Shyha I. S., Aspinwall D. K., Soo S. L., Bradley S.. 2009;Drill geometry and operating effects when cutting small diameter holes in CFRP. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture :1008–1014.
10. Yu Z., Chen J., Wu S., Xie Y., Wu H., Wang H., Peng H.-X.. 2024;Adaptive ultrasonic full-matrix imaging of internal defects in CFRP laminates with arbitrary stacking sequences. Composites Part B: Engineering 275:111309.
11. Zitoune R., Krishnaraj V., Sofiane Almabouacif B., Collombet F., Sima M., Jolin A.. 2012;Influence of machining parameters and new nano-coated tool on drilling performance of CFRP/Aluminium sandwich. Composites Part B: Engineering 43(3):1480–1488.
12. Shetty N., Shahabaz S. M., Sharma S. S., Divakara Shetty S.. 2017;A review on finite element method for machining of composite materials. Composite Structures 176:790–802.
13. Shettar M., Kowshik C. S. S., Manjunath M., Hiremath P.. 2020;Experimental investigation on mechanical and wear properties of nanoclay-epoxy composites. Journal of Materials Research and Technology 9(4):9108–9116.
14. Shettar M., Kini U. A., Sharma S., Hiremath P., Gowrishankar G. C. G.. 2020;Hygrothermal chamber aging effect on mechanical behavior and morphology of glass fiber-epoxy-nanoclay composites. Materials Research Express 7(1):015318.
15. Rathod D., Rathod M., Patel R., Shahabaz S. M., Shetty S. D., Shetty N.. 2021;A review on strengthening, delamination formation and suppression techniques during drilling of CFRP composites. Cogent Engineering 8(1):1941588.
16. Kong L., Gao D., Lu Y.. 2021;Novel tool for damage reduction in orbital drilling of CFRP composites. Composite Structures 273:114338.
17. Zhang J., Lin G., Vaidya U., Wang H.. 2023;Past, present and future prospective of global carbon fibre composite developments and applications. Composites Part B: Engineering 250:110463.
18. Nele L., Caggiano A., Improta I.. 2021;Machining of composite materials. Fiber Reinforced Composites: Constituents, Compatibility, Perspectives and Applications :83–111.
19. Dandekar C. R., Shin Y. C.. 2012;Modeling of machining of composite materials: A review. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 57:102–121.
20. Liu D. F., Tang Y. J., Cong W. L.. 2012. A review of mechanical drilling for composite laminates. In : Composite Structures. p. 1265–1279.
21. Gaugel S., Sripathy P., Haeger A., Meinhard D., Bernthaler T., Lissek F., Kaufeld M., Knoblauch V., Schneider G.. 2016;A comparative study on tool wear and laminate damage in drilling of carbon-fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP). Composite Structures 155:173–183.
22. Durão L. M. P., Tavares J. M. R., De Albuquerque V. H. C., Marques J. F. S., Andrade O. N.. 2014;Drilling damage in composite material. Materials 7(5):3802–3819.
23. Geier N., Xu J., Poór D. I., Dege J. H., Davim J. P.. 2023;A review on advanced cutting tools and technologies for edge trimming of carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites. Composites Part B: Engineering 266:111037.
24. Geng D., Liu Y., Shao Z., Zhang M., Jiang X., Zhang D.. 2020;Delamination formation and suppression during rotary ultrasonic elliptical machining of CFRP. Composites Part B: Engineering 183:107698.
25. Rahme P., Landon Y., Lagarrigue P., Lachaud F., Piquet R.. 2008;Study into causes of damage to carbon epoxy composite material during the drilling process. International Journal of Machining and Machinability of Materials 3(3–4):309–325.
26. Krishnaraj V., Prabukarthi A., Ramanathan A., Elanghovan N., Kumar M. S., Zitoune R., Davim J.. 2012;Optimization of machining parameters at high speed drilling of carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) laminates. Composites Part B: Engineering 43(4):1791–1799.
27. Jaiswal A. P., Park H. W.. 2022;Experimental and analytical examination of multidirectional carbon fiber–reinforced polymers for uncut fibers and their distributions during drilling. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 123(3):1323–1339.
28. Girot F., Dau F., Gutiérrez-Orrantia M. E.. 2017;New analytical model for delamination of CFRP during drilling. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 240:332–343.
29. Caggiano A., Improta I., Nele L.. 2018;Characterization of a new dry drill-milling process of carbon fibre reinforced polymer laminates. Materials 11(8):1470.
30. Arisawa H., Akama S., Nitani H.. 2012;High-performance cutting and grinding technology for CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic). Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Technical Review 49(3):3–9.
31. Costa E. S., Silva M. B., Machado A. R.. 2009;Burr produced on the drilling process as a function of tool wear and lubricant-coolant conditions. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 31:57–63.
32. Kim J., Min S., Dornfeld D. A.. 2001;Optimization and control of drilling burr formation of AISI 304L and AISI 4118 based on drilling burr control charts. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 41(7):923–936.
33. Li S., Dai L., Li C., Chen R., Qiu X., Li P., Ko T. J.. 2022;Prediction model of chisel edge thrust force and material damage mechanism for interlaminar-direction drilling of UD-CFRP composite laminates. Composite Structures 298:116023.
34. Karatas M. A., Gokkaya H., Nalbant M.. 2020;Optimization of machining parameters for abrasive water jet drilling of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer composite material using Taguchi method. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology 92(2):128–138.
35. Altin Karataç M., Motorcu A. R., Gökkaya H.. 2020;Optimization of machining parameters for kerf angle and roundness error in abrasive water jet drilling of CFRP composites with different fiber orientation angles. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 42(4):173.
36. Roldan-Jimenez L., Bañon F., Valerga A. P., Fernandez-Vidal S. R.. 2022;Design and analysis of CFRP drilling by electrical discharge machining. Polymers 14(7):1340.
37. Park C., Wei Y., Hassani M., Jin X., Lee J., Park S.. 2019;Low power direct laser-assisted machining of carbon fibre-reinforced polymer. Manufacturing Letters 22:19–24.
38. Gautam P., Singh K.. 2018;Experimental investigation and modeling of heat affected zone and surface roughness in erbium-doped fiber laser cutting of CFRP composite. Materials Today: Proceedings 5(11):24466–24475.
39. Thamizhvalavan P., Kanthababu M., Arivazhagan S., Gowri S.. 2015;Experimental investigations on material removal rate in abrasive water jet machining of Al/B4C /ZrSiO4 hybrid metal matrix composites. Journal of Applied Sciences Research 11(14):144–150.
40. Akman E., Erdoğan Y., Bora MÖ, Çoban O., Oztoprak B. G., Demir A.. 2019;Investigation of accumulated laser fluence and bondline thickness effects on adhesive joint performance of CFRP composites. International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives 89:109–116.
41. Wang F. J., Yin J. W., Ma J. W., Jia Z. Y., Yang F., Niu B.. 2017;Effects of cutting edge radius and fiber cutting angle on the cutting-induced surface damage in machining of unidirectional CFRP composite laminates. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 91:3107–3120.
42. Brinksmeier E., Fangmann S., Rentsch R.. 2011;Drilling of composites and resulting surface integrity. CIRP Annals 60(1):57–60.
43. Qiu X.-Y., Li P.-N., Tang L., Li C., Niu Q.-L., Li S.-J., Tang S., Ko T. J.. 2022;Determination of the optimal feed rate for step drill bit drilling CFRP pipe based on exit damage analysis. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 83:246–256.
44. Fu R., Jia Z., Wang F., Jin Y., Sun D., Cheng D., Yang L.. 2019;Cooling process of reverse air suctioning for damage suppression in drilling CFRP composites. Procedia CIRP 85:147–152.
45. Ahmad Sobri S., Whitehead D., Mohamed M., Mohamed J. J., Mohamad Amini M. H., Hermawan A., Mat Rasat M. S., Mohammad Sofi A. Z., Wan Ismail W. O. A. S.n, Norizan M. N.. 2020;Augmentation of the delamination factor in drilling of carbon fibre-reinforced polymer composites (CFRP). Polymers 12(11):2461.
46. Poór D. I., Geier N., Pereszlai C., Xu J.. 2021;A critical review of the drilling of CFRP composites: Burr formation, characterisation and challenges. Composites Part B: Engineering 223:109155.
47. Su F., Yuan J., Sun F., Wang Z., Deng Z.. 2018;Analytical cutting model for a single fiber to investigate the occurrences of the surface damages in milling of CFRP. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 96:2671–2685.
48. Kwon B.-C., Mai N. D. D., Cheon E. S., Ko S. L.. 2020;Development of a step drill for minimization of delamination and uncut in drilling carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP). The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 106:1291–1301.
49. Geng D., Teng Y., Liu Y., Shao Z., Jiang X., Zhang D.. 2019;Experimental study on drilling load and hole quality during rotary ultrasonic helical machining of small-diameter CFRP holes. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 270:195–205.
50. Basso I., Batista M. F., Jasinevicius R. G., Rubio J. C. C., Rodrigues A. R.. 2019;Micro drilling of carbon fiber reinforced polymer. Composite Structures 228:111312.
51. Park K. M., Kurniawan R., Yu Z., Ko T. J.. 2019;Evaluation of a hybrid cryogenic deburring method to remove uncut fibers on carbon fiber-reinforced plastic composites. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 101:1509–1523.
52. Hrechuk A., Bushlya V., Ståhl J.-E.. 2018;Hole-quality evaluation in drilling fiber-reinforced composites. Composite Structures 204:378–387.
53. Gao T., Li C., Wang Y., Liu X., An Q., Li H. N., Zhang Y., Cao H., Liu B., Wang D.. 2022;Carbon fiber reinforced polymer in drilling: From damage mechanisms to suppression. Composite Structures 286:115232.
54. Poulachon G., Outeiro J., Ramirez C., André V., Abrivard G.. 2016;Hole surface topography and tool wear in CFRP drilling. Procedia CIRP 45:35–38.
55. Babu J., Sunny T., Paul N. A., Mohan K. P., Philip J., Davim J. P.. 2016;Assessment of delamination in composite materials: a review. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 230(11):1990–2003.
56. Giasin K., Ayvar-Soberanis S., French T., Phadnis V.. 2017;3D finite element modelling of cutting forces in drilling fibre metal laminates and experimental hole quality analysis. Applied Composite Materials 24:113–137.
57. Abrao A., Faria P., Rubio J. C., Reis P., Davim J. P.. 2007;Drilling of fiber reinforced plastics: A review. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 186(1–3):1–7.
58. Jiao F., Li Y., Niu Y., Zhang Z., Bie W.. 2023;A review on the drilling of CFRP/Ti stacks: Machining characteristics, damage mechanisms and suppression strategies at stack interface. Composite Structures 305:116489.
59. Fernandes M., Cook C.. 2006;Drilling of carbon composites using a one shot drill bit. Part I: Five stage representation of drilling and factors affecting maximum force and torque. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 46(1):70–75.
60. Fernandes M., Cook C.. 2006;Drilling of carbon composites using a one shot drill bit. Part II: Empirical modeling of maximum thrust force. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture :76–9.
61. Wang F., Qian B., Jia Z., Fu R., Cheng D.. 2017;Secondary cutting edge wear of one-shot drill bit in drilling CFRP and its impact on hole quality. Composite Structures 178:341–52.
62. Xu J., An Q., Chen M.. 2014;A comparative evaluation of polycrystalline diamond drills in drilling high-strength T800S/250F CFRP. Composite Structures 117:71–82.
63. Jia Z., Fu R., Niu B., Qian B., Bai Y., Wang F.. 2016;Novel drill structure for damage reduction in drilling CFRP composites. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 110:55–65.
64. Hrechuk A., Bushlya V., M’Saoubi R., Ståhl J. E.. 2018;Experimental investigations into tool wear of drilling CFRP. Procedia Manufacturing 25:94–301.
65. Wang C. Y., Chen Y. H., An Q. L., Cai X. J., Ming W. W., Chen M.. 2015;Drilling temperature and hole quality in drilling of CFRP/aluminum stacks using diamond coated drill. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing 16:1689–1697.
66. Liu L., Qi C., Wu F., Xu J., Zhu X.. 2018;Experimental thrust forces and delamination analysis of GFRP laminates using candlestick drills. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 33(6):695–708.
67. Raj D. S., Karunamoorthy L.. 2016;Study of the effect of tool wear on hole quality in drilling CFRP to select a suitable drill for multi-criteria hole quality. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 31(5):587–592.
68. Tsao C., Hocheng H.. 2004;Taguchi analysis of delamination associated with various drill bits in drilling of composite material. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 44(10):1085–1090.
69. Grilo T., Paulo R., Silva C., Davim J.. 2013;Experimental delamination analyses of CFRPs using different drill geometries. Composites Part B: Engineering 45(1):1344–1350.
70. Marques A. T., Durão L. M., Magalhães A. G., Silva J. F., Tavares J. M. R.. 2009;Delamination analysis of carbon fibre reinforced laminates: Evaluation of a special step drill. Composites Science and Technology 69(14):2376–2382.
71. Feito N., Díaz-Álvarez J., López-Puente J., Miguelez M.. 2018;Experimental and numerical analysis of step drill bit performance when drilling woven CFRPs. Composite Structures 184:1147–1155.
72. Feito N., Diaz-Álvarez J., López-Puente J., Miguelez M.. 2016;Numerical analysis of the influence of tool wear and special cutting geometry when drilling woven CFRPs. Composite Structures 138:285–294.
73. Qiu X., Li P., Li C., Niu Q., Chen A., Ouyang P., Ko T. J.. 2018;Study on chisel edge drilling behavior and step drill structure on delamination in drilling CFRP. Composite Structures 203:404–413.
74. Melentiev R., Priarone P. C., Robiglio M., Settineri L.. 2016. Effects of tool geometry and process parameters on delamination in CFRP drilling: An overview. In : Procedia CIRP. p. 45, 31–34.
75. Cong W., Pei Z. J., Feng Q., Deines T. W., Treadwell C.. 2012;Rotary ultrasonic machining of CFRP: a comparison with twist drilling. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites 31(5):313–321.
76. Tsao C., Chiu Y.. 2011;Evaluation of drilling parameters on thrust force in drilling carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) composite laminates using compound core-special drills. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 51(9):740–744.
77. Geng D., Zhang D., Xu Y., He F., Liu F.. 2014;Comparison of drill wear mechanism between rotary ultrasonic elliptical machining and conventional drilling of CFRP. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites 33(9):797–809.
78. Baraheni M., Amini S.. 2019;Comprehensive optimization of process parameters in rotary ultrasonic drilling of CFRP aimed at minimizing delamination. International Journal of Lightweight Materials and Manufacture 2(4):379–387.
79. Liu J., Zhang D., Qin L., Yan L.. 2012;Feasibility study of the rotary ultrasonic elliptical machining of carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP). International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 53(1):141–150.
80. Yu Z., Li C., Kurniawan R., Park K. M., Ko T. J.. 2019;Drill bit with a helical groove edge for clean drilling of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 274:116291.
81. Sugita N., Shu L., Kimura K., Arai G., Arai K.. 2019;Dedicated drill design for reduction in burr and delamination during the drilling of composite materials. CIRP Annals 68(1):89–92.
82. Su F., Zheng L., Sun F., Wang Z., Deng Z., Qiu X.. 2018;Novel drill bit based on the step-control scheme for reducing the CFRP delamination. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 262:157–167.
83. Yu Z., Li C., Qiu X., Park K. M., Ko T. J.. 2020;Study on damage in carbon fiber reinforced plastic drilling using step cutting mechanism drill. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 826:154058.
84. Jia Z., Zhang C., Wang F., Fu R., Chen C.. 2020;Multi-margin drill structure for improving hole quality and dimensional consistency in drilling Ti/CFRP stacks. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 276:116405.
85. Jaiswal A. P., Khanna N., Bajpai V.. 2020;Orthogonal machining of heat treated Ti-10-2-3: FE and experimental. Materials and Manufacturing Processes 35(16):1822–1831.
86. Xu C., Wang Y., Xu J., Liu X.. 2020;Design of internal-chip-removal drill for CFRP drilling and study of influencing factors of drilling quality. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 106:1657–1669.
87. Phadnis V. A., Makhdum F., Roy A., Silberschmidt V. V.. 2013;Drilling in carbon/epoxy composites: Experimental investigations and finite element implementation. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing 47:41–51.
88. Xu W., Zhang L.. 2014;On the mechanics and material removal mechanisms of vibration-assisted cutting of unidirectional fibre-reinforced polymer composites. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 80:1–10.
89. Luo B., Li Y., Zhang K., Cheng H., Liu S.. 2016;Effect of workpiece stiffness on thrust force and delamination in drilling thin composite laminates. Journal of Composite Materials 50(5):617–625.
90. Cao S., Li H. N., Tan G., Wu C., Huang W., Zhou Q., Hu Z.. 2023;Bi-directional drilling of CFRPs: from principle to delamination suppression. Composites Part B: Engineering 248:110385.
91. Seeholzer L., Scheuner D., Wegener K.. 2020;Analytical force model for drilling out unidirectional carbon fibre reinforced polymers (CFRP). Journal of Materials Processing Technology 278:116489.
92. Ahn J. H., Kim G., Min B.-K.. 2023;Exit delamination at the material interface in drilling of CFRP/metal stack. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 85:227–235.
93. Wang D., Jiao F., Mao X.. 2020;Mechanics of thrust force on chisel edge in carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) drilling based on bending failure theory. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 169:105336.
94. Pereszlai C., Geier N., Poór D. I., Balázs B. Z., Póka G.. 2021;Drilling fibre reinforced polymer composites (CFRP and GFRP): An analysis of the cutting force of the tilted helical milling process. Composite Structures 262:113646.
95. Seo J., Banerjee N., Kim Y., Kim D. C., Park H. W.. 2020;Experimental and analytical investigation of the drilling forces of the carbon fiber reinforced plastics including thermal effects. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 58:1126–1137.
96. Jahromi A. S., Bahr B.. 2010;An analytical method for predicting cutting forces in orthogonal machining of unidirectional composites. Composites Science and Technology 70(16):2290–2297.
97. Bai Y., Jia Z-y, Fu R., Hao J-x, Wang F-j. 2021;Mechanical model for predicting thrust force with tool wear effects in drilling of unidirectional CFRP. Composite Structures 262:113601.
98. Luo B., Li Y., Zhang K., Cheng H., Liu S.. 2015;A novel prediction model for thrust force and torque in drilling interface region of CFRP/Ti stacks. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 81:1497–1508.
99. Song C., Jin X.. 2022;Analytical modeling of chip formation mechanism in cutting unidirectional carbon fiber reinforced polymer. Composites Part B: Engineering 239:109983.
100. Shen Y., Yang T., Liu C., Liu S., Du Y.. 2021;Cutting force modeling in orthogonal cutting of UD-CFRP considering the variable thickness of uncut material. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 114(5):1623–1634.
101. Qi Z., Zhang K., Cheng H., Wang D., Meng Q.. 2015;Microscopic mechanism based force prediction in orthogonal cutting of unidirectional CFRP. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 79:1209–1219.
102. Shan C., Zhang M., Yang Y., Zhang S., Luo M.. 2020;A dynamic cutting force model for transverse orthogonal cutting of unidirectional carbon/carbon composites considering fiber distribution. Composite Structures 251:112668.
103. Mishra R., Malik J., Singh I., Davim J. P.. 2010;Neural network approach for estimating the residual tensile strength after drilling in uni-directional glass fiber reinforced plastic laminates. Materials & Design 31(6):2790–2795.
104. Pramanik A., Littlefair G.. 2014;Developments in machining of stacked materials made of CFRP and titanium/aluminum alloys. Machining Science and Technology 18(4):485–508.
105. Hao J., Wang F., Zhao M., Bai Y., Jia Z.. 2021;Drill bit with clip-edges based on the force control model for reducing the CFRP damage. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites 40(5–6):206–219.
106. Shahani A., Abolfathitabar R.. 2019. Fracture analysis of finite length angle-ply composite double cantilever beam specimens. In : Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science. 233(3)p. 967–976.
107. Xu W., Zhang L.. 2016;Mechanics of fibre deformation and fracture in vibration-assisted cutting of unidirectional fibre-reinforced polymer composites. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 103:40–52.
108. Su F., Deng Z., Sun F., Li S., Wu Q., Jiang X.. 2019;Comparative analyses of damages formation mechanisms for novel drills based on a new drill-induced damages analytical model. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 271:111–125.
109. Jabbaripour B., Ansari M. J., Taheri A.. 2021;Investigating delamination, uncut fibers, tolerances and surface topography in high speed drilling of polypropylene composite reinforced with carbon fibers and calcium carbonate Nano-particles. International Journal of Material Forming 14(6):1417–1437.
110. Zhu W., Fu H., Li F., Ji X., Li Y., Bai F.. 2022;Optimization of CFRP drilling process: a review. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 123(5):1403–1432.
111. Geier N., Davim J. P., Szalay T.. 2019;Advanced cutting tools and technologies for drilling carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites: A review. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing 125:105552.
112. Li Y. X., Jiao F., Zhang Z. Q., Feng Z. B., Niu Y.. 2022;Research on entrance delamination characteristics and damage suppression strategy in drilling CFRP/Ti6Al4V stacks. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 76:518–531.
113. Wang F., Zhao M., Fu R., Liu X., Qiu S., Yan J., Zhang B.. 2022;Replaceable drill bit with compound step and sawtooth structures for damages and drilling-cost reduction of CFRP composite. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 81:1018–1027.
114. Qiu X., Li P., Niu Q., Chen A., Ouyang P., Li C., Ko T. J.. 2018;Influence of machining parameters and tool structure on cutting force and hole wall damage in drilling CFRP with stepped drills. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 97:857–865.
115. Heisel U., Pfeifroth T.. 2012;Influence of point angle on drill hole quality and machining forces when drilling CFRP. Procedia CIRP 1:471–476.
116. Xu J., Li C., Mi S., An Q., Chen M.. 2018;Study of drilling-induced defects for CFRP composites using new criteria. Composite Structures 201:1076–1087.
117. Durão L. M. P., Gonçalves D. J., Tavares J. M. R., de Albuquerque V. H. C., Vieira A. A., Marques A. T.. 2010;Drilling Tool Geometry Evaluation for Reinforced Composite Laminates. Composite Structures 92(7):1545–1550.
118. Xu J., An Q., Cai X., Chen M.. 2013;Drilling machinability evaluation on new developed high-strength T800S/250F CFRP laminates. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing 14:1687–1696.
119. John K., Kumaran S. T.. 2020;Backup support technique towards damage-free drilling of composite materials: A review. International Journal of Lightweight Materials and Manufacture 3(4):357–364.
120. Xu W., Zhang L.. 2016;Mechanics of fibre deformation and fracture in vibration-assisted cutting of unidirectional fibrereinforced polymer composites. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 103:40–52.
121. Geier N., Póka G., Jacsó Á, Pereszlai C.. 2022;A method to predict drilling-induced burr occurrence in chopped carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites based on digital image processing. Composites Part B: Engineering 242:110054.
122. Giasin K., Ayvar-Soberanis S.. 2017;An Investigation of burrs, chip formation, hole size, circularity and delamination during drilling operation of GLARE using ANOVA. Composite Structures 159:745–760.
123. Rajkumar G. M., Bhardwaj D., Kannan C., Oyyaravelu R., Balan A.. 2018;Effect of chilled air on delamination, induced vibration, burr formation and surface roughness in CFRP drilling: A comparative study. Materials Research Express 6(3):035305.
124. Bagchi A., Guha S.. 2018. Parametric optimization of burr height reduction and machining time in drilling operation on stainless steel specimen. In : Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. p. 012174.
125. Sadat A., Chan W., Wang B.. 1992;Delamination of graphite/epoxy laminate during drilling operation. Journal of Energy Resources Technology 114(2):139–141.
126. Domínguez-Monferrer C., Fernández-Pérez J., De Santos R., Miguélez M., Cantero J.. 2022;CFRP drilling process control based on spindle power consumption from real production data in the aircraft industry. Procedia CIRP 107:1533–1538.
127. Kolesnyk V., Peterka J., Alekseev O., Neshta A., Xu J., Lysenko B., Sahul M., Martinovič J., Hrbal J.. 2022;Application of ANN for analysis of hole accuracy and drilling temperature when drilling CFRP/Ti alloy stacks. Materials 15(5):1940.
128. Latha B., Senthilkumar V.. 2010;Application of artificial intelligence for the prediction of delamination in drilling GFRP composites. International Journal of Precision Technology 1(3–4):314–330.
129. Karnik S., Gaitonde V., Rubio J. C., Correia A. E., Abrão A., Davim J. P.. 2008;Delamination analysis in high speed drilling of carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP) using artificial neural network model. Materials & Design 29(9):1768–1776.
130. Baiocco G., Genna S., Leone C., Ucciardello N.. 2021;Prediction of laser drilled hole geometries from linear cutting operation by way of artificial neural networks. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 114:1685–1695.
131. Ranjan J., Patra K., Szalay T., Mia M., Gupta M. K., Song Q., Krolczyk G., Chudy R., Pashnyov V. A., Pimenov D. Y.. 2020;Artificial intelligence-based hole quality prediction in micro-drilling using multiple sensors. Sensors 20(3):885.
132. Lissek F., Tegas J., Kaufeld M.. 2016;Damage quantification for the machining of CFRP: An introduction about characteristic values considering shape and orientation of drilling-induced delamination. Procedia Engineering 149:2–16.
133. Geier N., Póka G., Pereszlai C.. 2019;Monitoring of orbital drilling process in CFRP based on digital image processing of characteristics of uncut fibres. Procedia CIRP 85:165–170.
134. Poór D., Geier N., Pereszlai C., Forintos N.. 2019. A pilot experimental research on drilling of CFRP under tensile stress. In : Proceedings of International Conference on Innovative Technologies. p. 126–129.
135. Hrechuk A., Johansson D., Bushlya V., Devin L., Ståhl J.-E.. 2018;Application of Colding tool life equation on the drilling fiber reinforcement polymers. Procedia Manufacturing 25:302–308.
136. Maleki H. R., Abazadeh B., Arao Y., Kubouchi M.. 2022;Selection of an appropriate non-destructive testing method for evaluating drilling-induced delamination in natural fiber composites. NDT & E International 126:102567.
137. Maghami A., Salehi M., Khoshdarregi M.. 2021;Automated vision-based inspection of drilled CFRP composites using multi-light imaging and deep learning. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology 35:441–453.
138. Khashaba U.. 2022;A novel approach for characterization of delamination and burr areas in drilling FRP composites. Composite Structures 290:115534.
139. Machado C. M., Silva D., Vidal C., Soares B., Teixeira J. P.. 2021;A new approach to assess delamination in drilling carbon fibre-reinforced epoxy composite materials. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 112:3389–3398.
140. Nagarajan V., Sundaram S., Rajadurai J.. 2011;A novel approach based on digital image analysis to evaluate refined delamination factor for E-Glass 21xK43 Gevetex/LY556/DY063 epoxy composite laminates. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 225(10):1977–1982.
141. Rubio J. C., Abrao A., Faria P., Correia A. E., Davim J. P.. 2008;Effects of high speed in the drilling of glass fibre reinforced plastic: evaluation of the delamination factor. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 48(6):715–720.
142. Shyha I., Soo S. L., Aspinwall D., Bradley S., Perry R., Harden P., Dawson S.. 2011;Hole quality assessment following drilling of metallic-composite stacks. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 51(7–8):569–578.
143. Caprino G., Tagliaferri V.. 1995;Damage development in drilling glass fibre reinforced plastics. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 35(6):817–829.
144. Isbilir O., Ghassemieh E.. 2012;Finite element analysis of drilling of carbon fibre reinforced composites. Applied Composite Materials 19:637–656.
145. Tao N., Chen G., Fang W., Li M.. 2023;Understanding the bowl-bottom effect in ultra-short pulsed laser drilling of CFRP laminate. Composite Structures 305:116498.
146. Wang P., Zhang Z., Liu D., Qiu W., Zhang Y., Zhang G.. 2022;Comparative investigations on machinability and surface integrity of CFRP plate by picosecond laser vs laser induced plasma micro-drilling. Optics & Laser Technology 151:108022.
147. Domínguez-Monferrer C., Fernández-Pérez J., De Santos R., Miguélez M., Cantero J.. 2022;Machine learning approach in non-intrusive monitoring of tool wear evolution in massive CFRP automatic drilling processes in the aircraft industry. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 65:622–639.
148. Angelone R., Caggiano A., Nele L., Teti R.. 2021;Optimal cutting parameters and tool geometry in drilling of CFRP/CFRP stack laminates for aeronautical applications. Procedia CIRP 99:398–403.
149. Wang Y., Luo Q., Xie H., Li Q., Sun G.. 2022;Digital image correlation (DIC) based damage detection for CFRP laminates by using machine learning based image semantic segmentation. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 230:107529.
150. Li W., Huang Y., Chen X., Zhang G., Rong Y., Lu Y.. 2021;Study on laser drilling induced defects of CFRP plates with different scanning modes based on multi-pass strategy. Optics & Laser Technology 144:107400.
151. Kim D., Beal A., Kang K., Kim S.-Y.. 2017;Hole quality assessment of drilled CFRP and CFRP-Ti stacks holes using polycrystalline diamond (PCD) tools. Carbon letters 23:1–8.
152. Zhang Y., Wu D., Ma X., Chen K., Guo Y.. 2019;Countersink accuracy control of thin-wall CFRP/Al stack drilling based on micro peck strategy. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 101:2689–2702.
153. Jia Z., Chen C., Wang F., Zhang C., Wang Q.. 2020;Analytical model for delamination of CFRP during drilling of CFRP/metal stacks. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 106:5099–5109.
154. Teti R., Segreto T., Caggiano A., Nele L.. 2020;Smart multi-sensor monitoring in drilling of CFRP/CFRP composite material stacks for aerospace assembly applications. Applied Sciences 10(3):758.
155. Campos Rubio J. C., Abrão A. M., Eustaquio Faria P., Correia A. E., Davim J. P.. 2008;Delamination in high speed drilling of carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP). Journal of Composite Materials 42(15):1523–1532.
156. Prakash C., Pramanik A., Basak A. K., Dong Y., Debnath S., Shankar S., Singh S., Wu L. Y., Zheng H. Y.. 2021;Investigating the efficacy of adhesive tape for drilling carbon fibre reinforced polymers. Materials 14(7):1699.
157. John K., Kumaran S. T., Kurniawan R., Ahmed F.. 2022;Evaluation of thrust force and delamination in drilling of CFRP by using active spring restoring backup force. Materials Today: Proceedings 49:269–274.
158. Wang G.-D., Melly S. K., Li N.. 2018;Using dampers to mitigate thrust forces during carbon-fibre reinforced polymer drilling: experimental and finite element evaluation. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites 37(1):60–74.
159. Shokrani A., Leafe H., Newman S. T.. 2019;Cryogenic drilling of carbon fibre reinforced plastic with tool consideration. Procedia CIRP 85:55–60.
160. Batista M. F., Basso I., de Assis Toti F., Rodrigues A. R., Tarpani J. R.. 2020;Cryogenic drilling of carbon fibre reinforced thermoplastic and thermoset polymers. Composite Structures 251:112625.
161. Jiao F., Li Y., Niu Y., Zhang Z., Bie W.. 2023;A review on the drilling of CFRP/Ti stacks: Machining characteristics, damage mechanisms and suppression strategies at stack interface. Composite Structures 305:116489.
162. Franz G., Vantomme P., Hassan M. H.. 2022;A review on drilling of multilayer fiber-reinforced polymer composites and aluminum stacks: optimization of strategies for improving the drilling performance of aerospace assemblies. Fibers 10(9):78.
163. Xu J., Lin T., Li L., Ji M., Davim J. P., Geier N., Chen M.. 2022;Numerical study of interface damage formation mechanisms in machining CFRP/Ti6Al4V stacks under different cutting sequence strategies. Composite Structures 285:115236.
164. Ahn J. H., Kim G., Min B.-K.. 2023;Exit delamination at the material interface in drilling of CFRP/metal stack. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 85:227–235.
165. Ghasemian Fard M., Baseri H., Zolfaghari A.. 2022;Experimental investigation of the effective parameters and performance of different types of structural tools in drilling CFRP/AL alloy stacks. Journal of Composite Materials 56(29):4461–4471.

Biography

Anand Prakash Jaiswal is currently a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Institute of Advanced Composite Materials, Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST). He holds a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST), South Korea, and an M .Tech. in Manufacturing Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, India. His research focuses on analytical modeling and optimization of machining techniques for composite materials, as well as the manufacturing of CFRP.

Hyung Wook Park is a distinguished Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST), South Korea. He earned his Ph.D. from the Georgia Institute of Technology, USA, and holds B.S. and M.S. degrees from Seoul National University, Korea. His research interests include machine tools, metal cutting processes, non-traditional machining techniques, surface texturing through metal cutting, FEM modeling, and advancements in robotic manufacturing. His contributions have significantly advanced the academic and scientific understanding of these critical research areas.

Article information Continued

Fig. 1

(a) Global demand for carbon fiber [4], (b) Global carbon fiber demand by applications in 2021 [17], and (c) Used material volume percentage in Boeing 747 and 787 [17] (Adapted from Refs. 4,17 with permission)

Fig. 2

Process of composite material drilling and evaluation

Fig. 3

CFRP drilling with delamination and uncut fiber [27]; CFRP hole mechanism of the last ply (a) Line diagram of point load through wedge angle, (b) Deflection of last ply, (c) Maximum deflection, (d) Break of the last ply, and (e) Final shape of the last ply with error (Adapted from Ref. 27 with permission)

Fig. 4

Fiber sequence and tool spindle rotation direction

Fig. 5

(a) Critical cutting zone for generating the uncut fiber [7] and (b) Comparative experimental image of the uncut fiber zone (Adapted from Ref. 7 with permission)

Fig. 6

Optimized drill geometry (a) Twisted drill, (b) One-shot drill, (c) Double point angle drill, (d) Brad point drill, (e) Step drill, and (f) Diamond core drill

Fig. 7

Modified tool geometry [63,8084] (Adapted from Refs. 63,8084 with permission)

Fig. 8

Mechanism of the tool and workpiece contact area and its cutting phenomenon [27,88] (Adapted from Ref. 27 with permission)

Fig. 9

Image processing for evaluating of uncut fibers and delamination [52] (Adapted from Ref. 52 with permission)

Fig. 10

(a) hole microscopic image and circumferential profile length distribution of (b) uncut fiber and (c) delamination fiber [52] (Adapted from Ref. 52 with permission)

Fig. 11

(a) CFRP drilling coating with epoxy ply top and bottom ply [155], (b) the top ply coated with the number of scotch tape [156], (c) CFRP drilling with the attachment of a damper [158], and (d) CFRP drilling with bottom ply supported through wet tissue and ice ply in cryogenic conditions with ultrasonic vibration [51]

Table 1

Different CFRP drilling and fiber ply sequences

S. N. Material Tool Ply/Sequence Remarks Refs.
1. UD-CFRP (T700 3 K) Step drill bit Interwoven at 90° angles Less uncut fiber is produced using a drill with a smaller core diameter. Furthermore, the uncut ratio increases with core diameter because less delamination results in fewer uncut fibers under the same cutting conditions. [48]
2. MD-CFRP Rotary ultrasonic helical grinding tool [−45°, 9°, 45°, 0°]6s They demonstrated that intermittent cutting, as opposed to continuous cutting, can be used to remove material from the cutting edges on the tool’s front surface. Compared with twisted drilled holes, rotary ultrasonic helical machining produces much better hole-edge quality. [49]
3. MD-CFRP (T300 PPS) Twisted Uncoated carbide drill Quasi-isotropic [(0°, 90°), (45°, −45°)2s, (0°, 90°)] The cutting edge approaches the uncut fiber thickness, and most of the cutting material flows through the helix angle and cone angle and applies a continuous force on the fiber plies, which deflects in the place of the cutting break and causes delamination. [50]
4. MD-CFRP (T700 12 K) Twisted tungsten carbide drill [0°, 90°]8s Bottom ply support through the wet tissue ice and a continuous supply of liquid nitrogen makes it possible to perform drilling without uncut fiber. [51]
5. SAAB CFRP Twisted cemented carbide drill bit [0°, 45°, −45°, 90°]7s and [45°, −45°]2s The findings revealed a nearly linear relationship between tool wear, the quantity of drilled holes, and hole quality. Additionally, it was discovered that the various criteria reacted differently to tool wear. [52]

Table 2

Boundary conditions that were used and their remarks about single deflected fiber

S. N. Mechanism Remarks Deflection fiber limit Output Refs.
1 Bending beam theory A single fiber bending equation was used to compute the fiber bending. 0 − (apre)
(apre) − (ap + hδ)
(ap + h − δ) − (+∞)
Delamination depth and fiber matrix deformation. Influence of cut depth during cutting force. [88,120]
2 Beam deflection equation The bending hypothesis can be used to calculate the chisel thrust force on the cutting edge. One way to conceive of carbon fiber is as an elastic beam. hfrt
hf < r
An analytical model of the chisel edge thrust force. [93]
3 Total potential energy This model provides a tiny representative volume element composed of a single carbon fiber and the carbon matrix all around it, whose size varies with the distribution of fibers and vacancies. 0 < z ≤ (apre)/sinθ
(apre) = sinθ < z ≤ (ap − δ) = sinθ + h
z > (ap − δ)/sinθ + h
Deviation of the extreme primary stress under three distinctive loads in the circumstances of instantaneous cutting force. [102]
4 Total energy of the cutting fiber The process of burr damage creation is also examined when the stiffness of the uncut fiber material is thin. Orthogonal cutting tests and CFRP laminate direction were performed to confirm the model’s accuracy. 0 ≤ xac + l
xac + l
Deformation of the fiber for various uncut thicknesses. fiber delamination lengths for various cutting depths and fiber thicknesses. [100]