资源目录
压缩包内文档预览：
编号：26771203
类型：共享资源
大小：2.81MB
格式：ZIP
上传时间：2019-11-26
上传人：QQ14****9609
认证信息
个人认证
郭**（实名认证）
陕西
IP属地：陕西
50
积分
- 关 键 词：
-
矿用
JH
10
绞车
设计
CAD
- 资源描述：
-
矿用JH-10回柱绞车的设计含6张CAD图,矿用,JH,10,绞车,设计,CAD
- 内容简介：
-
中期汇报表学生姓名XX专 业XX学 号XX设计（论文）题目矿用JH-10回柱绞车毕业设计（论文）前期工作小结一中期设计工作完成情况： 首先，在开题报告提交之后，开始搜寻并查阅大量余本课题相关的资料和文献，与老师商量的交涉之后，开始根据已有的课题进行毕业设计的相关工作。我的题目是矿用JH-10回柱绞车设计。查阅相关资料，整理资料熟悉现有回柱绞车在国内外的发展现状，同时掌握它们的工作原理。二存在的问及解决的措施：1，关于回柱绞车的工作原理，性能参数的计算和一些数据的确定：解决方案;翻阅资料查询有关这方面的知识，对数据进行整理和确定。2， 有关CAD的一些操作方法，还有图纸的格式进行调整等问题：解决方案：询问老师和同学向他们请教，有关这方面的知识。三后期工作安排： 部件图绘制，说明书编写，总图绘制，说明书编写，写论文副本，完成说明书、图纸绘制，准备答辩总图绘制，说明书编写指导教师意见工作端正，遵守学校出勤纪律，能主动的找导师交流。签名： 年 月 日XX中期情况检查表 学院名称： 机电工程学院 检查日期： 2018年 5月 29日学生姓名XX专 业XX指导教师XX设计（论文）题目矿用JH-10回柱绞车工作进度情况工作进度：完成了总体方案，进入部件设计阶段。是否符合任务书要求进度是 能否按期完成任务能 工作态度情况(态度、纪律、出勤、主动接受指导等)设计中能够遵守纪律，有事请假，虚心接受老师的指导意见，不断改进设计存在问题。 质量评价(针对已完成的部分)总体质量：一般。特别是传动轴的设计存在问题较大，考虑问题不够全面。解决方法不够全面。 存在问题和解决办法传动轴设计已经提出解决方案供学生选择。其余设计也存在问题。已经提出方案进行解决。 检查人签名 教学院长签名 DOI 10.1007/s00170-004-2328-8ORIGINAL ARTICLEInt J Adv Manuf Technol (2006) 28: 6166Fang-Jung Shiou Chao-Chang A. Chen Wen-Tu LiAutomated surfacefinishing of plastic injection mold steelwith spherical grinding and ball burnishingprocessesReceived: 30 March 2004 / Accepted: 5 July 2004 / Published online: 30 March 2005 Springer-Verlag London Limited 2005Abstract This study investigates the possibilities of automatedspherical grinding and ball burnishing surface finishing pro-cesses in a freeform surface plastic injection mold steel PDS5on a CNC machining center. The design and manufacture ofa grinding tool holder has been accomplished in this study.The optimal surface grinding parameters were determined usingTaguchis orthogonal array method for plastic injection moldingsteel PDS5 on a machining center. The optimal surface grind-ing parameters for the plastic injection mold steel PDS5 werethe combination of an abrasive material of PA Al2O3, a grind-ing speed of 18000 rpm, a grinding depth of 20 m, and a feedof 50 mm/min. The surface roughness Raof the specimen can beimproved from about 1.60 m to 0.35 m by using the optimalparameters for surface grinding. Surface roughness Racan befurther improved from about 0.343 m to 0.06m by using theball burnishing process with the optimal burnishing parameters.Applying the optimal surface grinding and burnishing parame-ters sequentially to a fine-milled freeform surface mold insert,the surface roughness Raof freeform surface region on the testedpart can be improved from about 2.15 m to 0.07m.Keywords Automated surface finishing Ballburnishing process Grinding process Surface roughness Taguchis method1 IntroductionPlastics are important engineering materials due to their specificcharacteristics, such as corrosion resistance, resistance to chemi-cals, low density, and ease of manufacture, and have increasinglyF.-J. Shiou (u) C.-C.A. Chen W.-T. LiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering,National Taiwan University of Science and Technology,No. 43, Section 4, Keelung Road, 106 Taipei, Taiwan R.O.C.E-mail: .twTel.: +88-62-2737-6543Fax: +88-62-2737-6460replaced metallic components in industrial applications. Injec-tion molding is one of the important forming processes for plas-tic products. The surface finish quality of the plastic injectionmold is an essential requirement due to its direct effects on theappearance of the plastic product. Finishing processes such asgrinding, polishing and lapping are commonly used to improvethe surface finish.The mounted grinding tools (wheels) have been widely usedin conventional mold and die finishing industries. The geometricmodel of mounted grinding tools for automated surface finish-ing processes was introduced in 1. A finishing process modelof spherical grinding tools for automated surface finishing sys-tems was developed in 2. Grinding speed, depth of cut, feedrate, and wheel properties such as abrasive material and abrasivegrain size, are the dominant parameters for the spherical grind-ing process, as shown in Fig. 1. The optimal spherical grindingparameters for the injection mold steel have not yet been investi-gated based in the literature.In recent years, some research has been carried out in de-termining the optimal parameters of the ball burnishing pro-cess (Fig. 2). For instance, it has been found that plastic de-formation on the workpiece surface can be reduced by usinga tungsten carbide ball or a roller, thus improving the surfaceroughness, surface hardness, and fatigue resistance 36. Theburnishing process is accomplished by machining centers 3,4and lathes 5,6. The main burnishing parameters having signifi-cant effects on the surface roughness are ball or roller material,burnishing force, feed rate, burnishing speed, lubrication, andnumber of burnishing passes, among others 3. The optimal sur-face burnishing parameters for the plastic injection mold steelPDS5 were a combination of grease lubricant, the tungsten car-bide ball, a burnishing speed of 200 mm/min, a burnishing forceof 300 N, and a feedof 40 m7. The depth of penetration oftheburnished surface using the optimal ball burnishing parameterswas about 2.5 microns. The improvement of the surface rough-ness through burnishing process generally ranged between 40%and 90% 37.The aim of this study was to develop spherical grinding andball burnishing surface finish processes of a freeform surface62plastic injection mold on a machining center. The flowchart ofautomated surface finish using spherical grinding and ball bur-nishing processes is shown in Fig. 3. We began by designing andmanufacturing the spherical grinding tool and its alignment de-vice for use on a machining center. The optimal surface sphericalgrinding parameters were determined by utilizing a Taguchisorthogonal array method. Four factors and three correspondinglevels were then chosen for the Taguchis L18matrix experiment.The optimal mounted spherical grinding parameters for surfacegrinding were then applied to the surface finish of a freeformsurface carrier. To improve the surface roughness, the groundsurface was further burnished, using the optimal ball burnishingparameters.Fig.1. Schematic diagram of the spherical grinding processFig.2. Schematic diagram of the ball-burnishing processFig.3. Flowchart of automated surface finish using spherical grinding andball burnishing processes2 Design of the spherical grinding tool and itsalignment deviceTo carry out the possible spherical grinding process of a freeformsurface, the center of the ball grinder should coincide with thez-axis of the machining center. The mounted spherical grindingtool and its adjustment device was designed, as shown in Fig. 4.The electric grinder was mounted in a tool holder with two ad-justable pivot screws. The center of the grinder ball was wellaligned with the help of the conic groove of the alignment com-ponents. Having aligned the grinder ball, two adjustable pivotscrews were tightened; after which, the alignment componentscould be removed. The deviation between the center coordi-nates of the ball grinder and that of the shank was about 5m,which was measured by a CNC coordinate measuring machine.The force induced by the vibration of the machine bed is ab-sorbed by a helical spring. The manufactured spherical grind-ing tool and ball-burnishing tool were mounted, as shown inFig. 5. The spindle was locked for both the spherical grindingprocess and the ball burnishing process by a spindle-lockingmechanism.63Fig.4. Schematic illustration of the spherical grinding tool and its adjust-ment device3 Planning of the matrixexperiment3.1 Configuration of Taguchis orthogonal arrayThe effects of several parameters can be determined efficientlyby conducting matrix experiments using Taguchis orthogonalarray 8. To match the aforementioned spherical grinding pa-rameters, the abrasive material of the grinder ball (with the diam-eter of 10 mm), the feed rate, the depth of grinding, and therevolution of the electric grinder were selected as the four experi-mental factors (parameters) and designated as factor A to D (seeTable 1) in this research. Three levels (settings) for each factorwere configured to cover the range of interest, and were identi-Fig.5. a Photo of the spherical grinding tool bPhoto of the ball burnishing toolTable1. The experimental factors and their levelsFactorLevel123A. Abrasive materialSiCAl2O3, WAAl2O3, PAB. Feed (mm/min)50100200C. Depth of grinding (m)205080D. Revolution (rpm)120001800024000fied by the digits 1, 2, and 3. Three types of abrasive materials,namely silicon carbide (SiC), white aluminum oxide (Al2O3,WA), and pink aluminum oxide (Al2O3, PA), were selected andstudied. Three numerical values of each factor were determinedbased on the pre-study results. The L18orthogonal array was se-lected to conduct the matrix experiment for four 3-level factorsof the spherical grinding process.3.2 Definition of the data analysisEngineering design problems can be divided into smaller-the-better types, nominal-the-best types, larger-the-better types,signed-target types, among others 8. The signal-to-noise (S/N)ratio is used as the objective function for optimizing a product orprocess design. The surface roughness value of the ground sur-face via an adequate combination of grinding parameters shouldbe smaller than that of the original surface. Consequently, thespherical grinding process is an example of a smaller-the-bettertype problem. The S/N ratio, , is defined by the followingequation 8: = 10log10(meansquarequalitycharacteristic)= 10log10?1nn?i=1y2i?.(1)where:yi: observations of the quality characteristic under different noiseconditionsn: number of experimentAfter the S/N ratio from the experimental data of each L18orthogonal array is calculated, the main effect of each factorwas determined by using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) tech-nique and an F-ratio test 8. The optimization strategy of the64smaller-the better problem is to maximize , as defined by Eq. 1.Levels that maximize will be selected for the factors that havea significant effect on . The optimal conditions for sphericalgrinding can then be determined.4 Experimentalwork and resultsThe material used in this study was PDS5 tool steel (equiva-lent to AISI P20) 9, which is commonly used for the molds oflarge plastic injection products in the field of automobile com-ponents and domestic appliances. The hardness of this materialis about HRC33 (HS46) 9. One specific advantage of this ma-terial is that after machining, the mold can be directly usedfor further finishing processes without heat treatment due to itsspecial pre-treatment. The specimens were designed and manu-factured so that they could be mounted on a dynamometer tomeasure the reaction force. The PDS5specimen was roughly ma-chined and then mounted on the dynamometer to carry out thefine milling on a three-axis machining center made by Yang-Iron Company (type MV-3A), equipped with a FUNUC Com-pany NC-controller (type 0M) 10. The pre-machined surfaceroughness was measured, using Hommelwerke T4000 equip-ment, to be about 1.6m. Figure 6 shows the experimentalset-up of the spherical grinding process. A MP10 touch-triggerprobe made by the Renishaw Company was also integrated withthe machining center tool magazine to measure and determinethe coordinated origin of the specimen to be ground. The NCcodes needed for the ball-burnishing path were generated byPowerMILL CAM software. These codes can be transmitted tothe CNC controller of the machining center via RS232 serialinterface.Table 2 summarizes the measured ground surface roughnessvalue Raand the calculated S/N ratio of each L18orthogonal ar-ray using Eq. 1, after having executed the 18 matrix experiments.The average S/N ratio for each level of the four factors can beobtained, as listed in Table 3, by taking the numerical values pro-vided in Table 2. The average S/N ratio for each level of the fourfactors is shown graphically in Fig. 7.Fig.6. Experimental set-up to determine the op-timal spherical grinding parametersTable2. Ground surface roughness of PDS5 specimenExp.Inner arrayMeasured surfaceResponseno.(control factors)roughness value (Ra)ABCDy1y2y3S/N ratioMean(m)(m)(m) (dB)y (m)111110.350.350.359.1190.350212220.370.360.388.6340.370313330.410.440.407.5970.417421230.630.650.643.8760.640522310.730.770.782.3800.760623120.450.420.397.5200.420731320.340.310.329.8010.323832130.270.250.2811.4710.267933210.320.320.329.8970.3201011220.350.390.408.3900.3801112330.410.500.436.9680.4471213110.400.390.427.8830.4031321130.330.340.319.7120.3271422210.480.500.476.3120.4831523320.570.610.534.8680.5701631310.590.550.545.0300.5601732120.360.360.358.9540.3571833230.570.530.535.2930.543Table3. Average S/N ratios by factor levels (dB)FactorABCDLevel 18.0997.6559.1106.770Level 25.7787.4537.0678.028Level 38.4087.1766.1077.486Effect2.6300.4793.0031.258Rank2413Mean7.428The goal in the spherical grinding process is to minimize thesurface roughness value of the ground specimen by determin-ing the optimal level of each factor. Since log is a monotonedecreasing function, we should maximize the S/N ratio. Conse-quently, we can determine the optimal level for each factor asbeing the level that has the highest value of . Therefore, based65Fig.7. Plots of control factor effectson the matrix experiment, the optimal abrasive material was pinkaluminum oxide; the optimal feed was 50 mm/min; the optimaldepth of grinding was 20 m; and the optimal revolution was18000 rpm, as shown in Table 4.The main effect of each factor was further determined byusing an analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique and an F ratiotest in order to determine their significance (see Table 5). TheF0.10,2,13is 2.76 for a level of significance equal to 0.10 (or90% confidence level); the factors degree of freedom is 2 andthe degree of freedom for the pooled error is 13, according toF-distribution table 11. An F ratio value greater than 2.76 canbe concluded as having a significant effect on surface roughnessand is identified by an asterisk. As a result, the feed and the depthof grinding have a significant effect on surface roughness.Five verification experiments were carried out to observe therepeatability of using the optimal combination of grinding pa-rameters, as shown in Table 6. The obtainable surface roughnessvalue Raof such specimen was measured to be about 0.35 m.Surface roughness was improved by about 78% in using the op-Table4. Optimal combination of spherical grinding parametersFactorLevelAbrasiveAl2O3, PAFeed50 mm/minDepth of grinding20mRevolution18000 rpmTable5. ANOVA table for S/N ratio of surface roughnessFactorDegreesSumMeanF ratioof freedomof squaressquaresA224.79112.3963.620B20.6920.346C228.21814.1094.121D24.7762.388Error939.043Total1797.520Pooled to error1344.5113.424F ratio value 2.76 has significant effect on surface roughnessTable6. Surface roughness value of the tested specimen after verificationexperimentExp. no.Measured value Ra(m)Mean y (m)S/N ratioy1y2y310.300.310.330.31310.07320.360.370.360.3638.80230.360.370.370.3678.71440.350.370.340.3539.03150.330.360.350.3479.163Mean0.3499.163timal combination of spherical grinding parameters. The groundsurface was further burnished using the optimal ball burnishingparameters. A surface roughness value of Ra= 0.06 m was ob-tainable after ball burnishing. Improvement of the burnished sur-face roughness observed with a 30 optical microscope is shownin Fig. 8. The improvement of pre-machined surfaces roughnesswas about 95% after the burnishing process.The optimal parameters for surface spherical grinding ob-tained from the Taguchis matrix experiments were applied tothe surface finish of the freeform surface mold insert to evalu-ate the surface roughness improvement. A perfume bottle wasselected as the testedcarrier. The CNCmachining of the mold in-sert for the tested object was simulated with PowerMILL CAMsoftware. After fine milling, the mold insert was further groundwith the optimal spherical grinding parameters obtained fromthe Taguchis matrix experiment. Shortly afterwards, the groundsurface was burnished with the optimal ball burnishing parame-ters to further improve the surface roughness of the tested object(see Fig. 9). The surface roughness of the mold insert was meas-ured with Hommelwerke T4000 equipment. The average surfaceroughness value Raon a fine-milled surface of the mold insertwas 2.15 m on average; that on the ground surface was 0.45 mFig.8. Comparison between the pre-machined surface, ground surface andthe burnished surface of the tested specimen observed with a toolmakermicroscope (30)66Fig.9. Fine-milled, ground and burnished mold insert of a perfume bottleon average; and that on burnished surface was 0.07 m on aver-age. The surface roughness improvement of the tested object onground surface was about (2.150.45)/2.15 = 79.1%, and thaton the burnished surface was about (2.150.07)/2.15 = 96.7%.5 ConclusionIn this work, the optimal parameters of automated spheri-cal grinding and ball-burnishing surface finishing processes ina freeform surface plastic injection mold were developed suc-cessfully on a machining center. The mounted spherical grindingtool (and its alignment components) was designed and manu-factured. The optimal spherical grinding parameters for surfacegrinding were determined by conducting a Taguchi L18matrixexperiments. The optimal spherical grinding parameters for theplastic injection mold steel PDS5 were the combination of theabrasive material of pink aluminum oxide (Al2O3, PA), a feedof 50 mm/min, a depth of grinding 20m, and a revolution of18000 rpm. The surface roughness Raof the specimen can beimproved from about 1.6 m to 0.35 m by using the optimalspherical grinding condi
- 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