Measuring tool life in production In practical machining, tool life may be expressed using several equivalent measures under stated conditions. Which of the following are accepted ways to quantify tool life?

Introduction / Context:
Tool life is central to cost, quality, and scheduling. Because processes and parts differ, industry uses several practical measures to define when a tool has reached its end of life under specified criteria.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Consistent cutting parameters and a defined end-of-life criterion (e.g., maximum wear or finish limit).
• Production environment where parts count, time, and volume can be tracked.

Concept / Approach:
Tool life can be captured as: (1) number of parts produced per sharpening or insert edge; (2) cutting time until reaching a wear criterion; or (3) total volume of metal removed per edge. Each correlates with cost-per-part and scheduling.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Define a wear or finish limit (e.g., flank wear width).Track pieces produced, or run time, or volume removed until the limit is reached.Any of these metrics expresses tool life when tied to the defined limit.

Verification / Alternative check:
Standards and textbooks accept multiple life metrics; Taylor's tool life equation commonly uses time, but production uses parts count or volume for convenience.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only flank wear width (E) is a criterion, not itself an operational metric unless linked to time, pieces, or volume.

Common Pitfalls:
Comparing tool life across different metrics without normalization; failing to note the end-of-life criterion; ignoring effects of regrinds/edge indexing.

Final Answer:
all of the above