超声旋风铣削设计[含CAD图纸和说明书等资料]
收藏
资源目录
压缩包内文档预览：(预览前20页/共68页)
编号：21897773
类型：共享资源
大小：4.72MB
格式：ZIP
上传时间：2019-09-09
上传人：好资料QQ****51605
认证信息
个人认证
孙**（实名认证）
江苏
IP属地：江苏
50
积分
- 关 键 词：
-
含CAD图纸和说明书等资料
超声
旋风
铣削
设计
cad
图纸
以及
说明书
仿单
资料
- 资源描述：
-
【温馨提示】 dwg后缀的文件为CAD图，可编辑，无水印，高清图，压缩包内含CAD图的预览图片，仅用于预览，压缩包内文档可直接点开预览，需要原稿请自助充值下载，请见压缩包内的文件及预览，所见才能所得，请细心查看有疑问可以咨询QQ：414951605或1304139763
- 内容简介：
-
journal of materials processing technology 1 9 7 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 200205journal homepage: /locate/jmatprotecComparison of slurry effect on machiningcharacteristics of titanium in ultrasonic drillingR. Singha, J.S. KhambabaMechanical & Production Engineering Department, G.N.D.E. College, Ludhiana 141006, IndiabMechanical Engineering Department, Punjabi University, Patiala 147004, Indiaa r t i c l ei n f oArticle history:Received 24 December 2006Received in revised form28 May 2007Accepted 1 June 2007Keywords:Ultrasonic drillingMaterial removal rateTool wear rateSilicon carbideBoron carbideAluminaStainless steelTitaniumHigh speed steela b s t r a c tThis paper initially reviews machining of titanium and its alloys with three different slur-ries (namely silicon carbide, boron carbide and alumina) and details background work onmachinability of the same in ultrasonic drilling. Experimental research has been subse-quently presented on the production of 5mm diameter holes in pure titanium (TITAN15,ASTM Gr2) and titanium alloy (TITAN31, ASTM Gr.5) using ultrasonic drilling. This entailedthe use of a 20kHz piezoelectric transducer with three solid tools of stainless steel, titaniumand high-speed steel, operating in silicon carbide, boron carbide and alumina slurry. Thedata presented includes main effect plots for material removal rate and tool wear rate. Theresults suggested that boron carbide slurry and stainless steel tool was giving best materialremoval rate. Also relative hardness of toolwork piece affects the material removal rate inultrasonic machining. 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.1.IntroductionTitanium alloys are generally regarded as been amongst themost difficult of work piece materials to machine in spite oftheir relatively low hardness (e.g. Ti 6/4 annealed 350HV).This is due to their low thermal conductivity, which con-centrates heat in the cutting zone (Ti 6/4 has a thermalconductivity of 11W/mK for AISI 405 steel), high chemicalreactivity at elevated temperature and a tendency to formlocalized shear bands. Titanium and its alloys are branded asdifficult to machine materials (Verma et al., 2003). Unfortu-nately, the machining of titanium is in general more difficultand consequently a significant proportion of production costsCorresponding author.E-mail address: rupindersingh78 (R. Singh).may relate to machining, even though only small volumes ofmaterial may be removed. Titanium and its alloys are verypopular and are very widely used in aerospace, marine gasturbine engines and surgical applications. Poor thermal con-ductivity of titanium alloys retard the dissipation of heatgenerated, creating, instead a very high temperature at thetoolwork piece interface and adversely affecting the toollife (Dornfeld et al., 1999). Titanium is chemically reactive atelevated temperature and therefore the tool material eitherrapidly dissolves or chemically reacts during the machin-ing process resulting in chipping and premature tool failure(Verma et al., 2003). Compounding of these characteristics isthe low elastic modulus of titanium, which permits greater0924-0136/$ see front matter 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.06.026journal of materials processing technology 1 9 7 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 200205201deflection of the work piece and once again adds to thecomplexityofmachiningthesealloys(SME,1985).Theconven-tional machining processes thus are unable to provide goodmachining characteristics on titanium alloys. Commerciallythese alloys are machined by electric discharge machining,which is giving good material removal rate however accuracyand surface finish are some problematic area. Another non-conventional machining process that is ultrasonic drilling iswidely used nowadays for both conductive and non-metallicmaterials; preferably those with low ductility (Koval Chenkoet al., 1986; Kremer et al., 1988; Moreland, 1988) and hard-ness above 40HRC (Verma et al., 2003; Dornfeld et al., 1999;Ezugwa and Wang, 1997; Gilmore, 1990), e.g. inorganic glasses,silicon nitride, etc. (Thoe et al., 1998; IMS, 2002; Khamba andSingh Rupinder, 2003; Benedict Gary, 1987; Haslehurst, 1981;Pentland and Ektermanis, 1965). In this process tool is madeof tough material, oscillated at frequencies of the order of2030Kc/s with amplitude of about 0.02mm. An abrasive filledfluid flushed through the gap between master and work piece.The material removal mechanism involves both erosion andgrinding (Benedict Gary, 1987). The principle of stationaryultrasonic drilling has been shown in Fig. 1.The tiny abrasivechip off microscopic flakes and grinds a counterpart of face.The work material is not stressed, distorted or heated becausethegrindingforceisseldomover2lb(IMS,2002).Thereisneverany tool to work contact, and presence of cool slurry makesthis a cold cutting-process.The tool used for machining has been prepared by sil-ver brazing process (Singh, 2002). The amplitude of vibrationsgiven to the tool also influences the cutting rate (Khamba andSingh Rupinder, 2003). It has been found that the materialremoval rate is affected by amplitude of oscillations, size ofabrasive (Singh, 2002; Singh and Khamba, 2007a). There arenumber of applications of ultrasonic drilling, ranging from thefabrication of small holes in alumina substrates, to engravingglassware, to drilling large holes through laser blocks (IMS,2002). Fig. 2 shows the three-dimensional view of ultrasonicdrilling using either a magnetostrictive or piezoelectric trans-ducerwithbrazedandscrewedtooling.IthasbeenobservedinexperimentationusingaluminaasslurryandTITAN15asworkmaterial,materialremovalratefirstdecreaseswithinincreasein power rating (from 150W to 300W) and than increases from300W to 450W of ultrasonic drilling machine (USM) (Khambaand Singh Rupinder, 2003).Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of ultrasonic drilling,t=penetration in to tool, w=penetration in to work piece.Fig. 2 Three-dimensional pictorial view of USM.In the present experimental set-up the typical valueofamplitudeandfrequencyofvibrationusedwere0.02530.0258mm and 20kHz200Hz. This experimentalstudy has been conducted with the objective to understandmaterial removal rate and tool wear rate comparison ofTITAN15 and TITAN31 (having different composition, dif-ferent toughness) when drilled ultrasonically; with threedifferent types of slurries, namely silicon carbide (SiC), boroncarbide (B4C), and alumina (Al2O3) (each of 320 grit size).The pure titanium TITAN15, has ultimate tensile strength of491MPa (chemical analysis: C, 0.006%; H, 0.0007%; N, 0.014%;O, 0.140%; Fe, 0.05%; Ti, balance) and titanium alloy TITAN31,has ultimate tensile strength of 994MPa (chemical analysis:C, 0.019%; H, 0.0011%; N, 0.007%; O, 0.138%; Al, 6.27%; V, 4.04%;Fe, 0.05%; Ti, balance).The machining was performed on 500W Sonic-Mill, ultra-sonic drilling machine at three different power ratings (i.e. at150W, 300W and 450W), based upon pilot experimentation.Three conventional tool materials namely stainless steel (SS),titanium (Ti) and high-speed steel (HSS) have been used astool combinations with titanium as work material to find outmaterial removal rate (MRRs) and tool wear rate (TWR) at fixslurry concentration and temperature. The slurry concentra-tion was fixed at 15vol.% and slurry temperature at 25.7C(room temperature). An experimental set-up having a provi-sion for variation in the process parameters was designed andfabricated. Fig. 3 shows work piece dimensions. The dimen-sions of the tool were decided keeping in view the limitationsof the horn shape to economize the machining operation(Fig. 4).2.ExperimentationThe experiments have been conducted in six set-ups. In thefirstset-up,experimentwasperformedtodeterminetheeffect202journal of materials processing technology 1 9 7 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 200205Fig. 3 Detailed drawing of the work piece.on TITAN15 of SS tool using alumina slurry of 320 grit size; at15%concentrationindistilledwaterassuspensionmedia.Theexperiment started by setting power rating of the machine at(30% of 500W) 150W of ultrasonic drilling machine. The ini-tial weight of titanium work piece that is of TITAN15 andtool that is of SS was measured. Then machine was allowedto drill for fixed depth of 1mm with constant slurry flow rateand slurry temperature. The depth was closely watched usingdial gauge. Correspondingly, time taken by USM for drillingwas measured using stopwatch. After machining was com-pleted, work piece and tool weight was measured for findingdifference in weight loss.Corresponding material removal rate and tool wear ratewere calculated at 150W, 300W, and 450W (30%, 60% and 90%of 500W). In the first set-up two more experiments were setusing TITAN15 work piece SS tool with B4C slurry and SiCslurry, respectively. Fig. 5 shows the trend of MRR and TWR ofTITAN15 work material with SS tool at different power ratingof machine used.The second set-up involved machining of TITAN31 workpiece by SS tool at three settings of ultrasonic power ratingFig. 4 Detailed drawing of the tool geometry (Singh andKhamba, 2007a,b).Fig. 5 MRR and TWR vs. power rating using (W/P TITAN15and tool SS).Fig. 6 MRR and TWR vs. power rating using (W/P TITAN31and tool SS).with Al2O3, B4C and SiC slurry. Corresponding MRR and TWRwere plotted (refer Fig. 6). The third and fourth set-up coveredmachining of TITAN15 and TITAN31 work piece by Ti tool atthree settings of ultrasonic power rating with Al2O3, B4C andSiC slurry. Corresponding MRR and TWR were plotted (referFigs. 7 and 8).In the fifth and sixth set-up machining of TITAN15 andTITAN31 work piece by HSS tool at three settings of ultra-sonic power rating with Al2O3, B4C and SiC slurry has beenperformed. Corresponding MRR and TWR were plotted (referFigs. 9 and 10).journal of materials processing technology 1 9 7 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 200205203Fig. 7 MRR and TWR vs. power rating using (W/P TITAN15and tool Ti).3.Results and discussionFrom repetitive number of experiments conducted under sixdifferent set-ups, the comparative results have been plotted.FromFig.5,ithasbeenobservedthatMRRofTITAN15isoveralllower than TWR while using SS tool with Al2O3slurry. How-ever trend for MRR in all three experiments of first set-up weresimilar. The increase of MRR with increase in power rating ofmachine is quite obvious because of higher value of powerrating abrasive particles strikes with more momentum andkinetic energy with work piece. Hence more erosion of workpiece but in certain cases, with increase in power rating, MRRdecreases which may be because of strain hardening of workpiece. The increase of tool wear rate with increase in MRR andFig. 8 MRR and TWR vs. power rating using (W/P TITAN31and tool Ti).Fig. 9 MRR and TWR vs. power rating using (W/P TITAN15and tool HSS).Fig. 10 MRR and TWR vs. power rating using (W/PTITAN31 and tool HSS).power rating is quite obvious but sometimes TWR decreaseswithpowerratingincrease/increaseinMRR;thereasonforthisisagainstrainhardeningoftoolsurface.Theselectionofslurrytype for MRR of TITAN15 in this case comes out as unimpor-tant factor. However better tool properties were obtained withAl2O3slurry.As regards to machining of TITAN31 with SS tool thetrend for MRR and TWR were different from previous case ofTITAN15 with SS tool (refer Fig. 6). The main reason for thisvariation may be strain hardening of work piece/tool materialat specific ultrasonic power rating based upon its mate-rial/chemicalcompositioncharacteristics.Thebestparametersetting for machining of TITAN31 with SS tool has beenobserved at 300W with B4C slurry.204journal of materials processing technology 1 9 7 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 200205Fig. 11 Photomicrograph of the machined surface showing comparison of the conventional machining and ultrasonicmachining; magnification: 100. Ultrasonic machined surface (Ra 0.46), conventionally machined surface (Ra 0.8).In the next set-up while using titanium tool it has beenfound that for TITAN15; MRR showed insignificant effect ofslurry type, where as for TITAN31 choice of slurry has comeout as important factor. The best settings have been attainedwith B4C slurry at 300W for TITAN31.The fifth and sixth set-up highlighted machining with HSStool for TITAN15 and ITAN31 work piece. The trend obtainedfor MRR and TWR in fifth and sixth set-ups is almost similarfor Al2O3and B4C slurry, but for SiC some variation has beenobserved. Overall B4C slurry comes out as better option. Thismay be because of better work piece and tool combinationsbased on relative hardness of tool and work piece for specificmachining conditions.Fig. 11 shows the surface of an ultrasonically machinedtitanium sample exhibits a non-directional surface texturewhencomparedwithaconventionallymachined(ground)sur-face. These refined grain structure, resulting from ultrasonicmachining, can give better strength and mechanical proper-ties. The results agree with experimental observations madeotherwise (Singh and Khamba, 2006, 2007b; Jadoun et al.,2006).4.ConclusionsFrom the experiment following conclusions can be drawn:1. Titanium is well machinable using ultrasonic drillingmachine. It is not always necessary that if work piecewith higher toughness value is machined, it will have lessMRRratheritiscombinationeffectofmaterialcomposition(hardness of work piece) relative of tool and work piece.Less TWR and better MRR can be attained by using spe-cific tool, work piece combination at specific power ratingvalues and controlled experimental conditions like slurrytype.2. Best results have been obtained with SS tool and boron car-bide slurry. These results show close relationship betweenthe experimental observations made otherwise (Singh andKhamba, 2007b).3. No major fatigue problems were encountered with thestainless steel, titanium and high-speed steel tool, anychipping/fracture generally being due to tool/hole mis-alignment during fabrication.4. The verification experiments revealed that on an averagethere was 34.46% improvement in MRR, for the selectedwork piece (TITAN15 and TITAN31).referencesBenedict Gary, F., 1987. Non Traditional Manufacturing Processes.Marcel Dekker, Inc, pp. 6786.Dornfeld, D.A., Kim, J.S., Dechow, H., Hewsow, J., Chen, L.J., 1999.Drilling burr formation in titanium alloy Ti6Al4V. Ann. CIRP48, 7376.Ezugwa, E.O., Wang, Z.M., 1997. Titanium alloys and theirmachinabilitya review. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 68,262274.Gilmore, R., 1990. Ultrasonic Machining of Ceramics, SME PaperMS 90-346, p. 12.Haslehurst, M., 1981. Manufacturing Technology, 3rd ed. Arnold,Australia, pp. 270271.Instruction Manual for Stationary SONIC-MILL 500 W Model,2002. Sonic-Mill, USA.Jadoun, R.S., Kumar, P., Mishra, B.K., Mehta, R.C.S., 2006.Ultrasonic machining of titanium and its alloys: a review. Int.J. Mach. Mach. Mater. 1 (1), 94114.Khamba, J., Singh Rupinder, S., 2003. Effect of alumina (whitefused) slurry in ultrasonic assisted drilling of titanium alloys(TITAN 15). In: Proceedings of the National Conference onMaterials and Related Technologies (NCMRT), pp. 7579.Koval Chenko, M.S., Paustovskii, A.V., Perevyazko, V.A., 1986.Influence of pro
- 温馨提示:
1: 本站所有资源如无特殊说明，都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。图纸软件为CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
2: 本站的文档不包含任何第三方提供的附件图纸等，如果需要附件，请联系上传者。文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
3.本站RAR压缩包中若带图纸，网页内容里面会有图纸预览，若没有图纸预览就没有图纸。
4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
5. 人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间，仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理，对用户上传分享的文档内容本身不做任何修改或编辑，并不能对任何下载内容负责。
6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容，请与我们联系，我们立即纠正。
7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。
人人文库网所有资源均是用户自行上传分享，仅供网友学习交流，未经上传用户书面授权，请勿作他用。
川公网安备: 51019002004831号