| Literature DB >> 26858161 |
Fang Ji1,2,3, Min Xu4, Chao Wang5,6, Xiaoyuan Li2, Wei Gao2, Yunfei Zhang2, Baorui Wang2,3, Guangping Tang2, Xiaobin Yue2.
Abstract
The cubic Fe3O4 nanoparticles with sharp horns that display the size distribution between 100 and 200 nm are utilized to substitute the magnetic sensitive medium (carbonyl iron powders, CIPs) and abrasives (CeO2/diamond) simultaneously which are widely employed in conventional magnetorheological finishing fluid. The removal rate of this novel fluid is extremely low compared with the value of conventional one even though the spot of the former is much bigger. This surprising phenomenon is generated due to the small size and low saturation magnetization (M s) of Fe3O4 and corresponding weak shear stress under external magnetic field according to material removal rate model of magnetorheological finishing (MRF). Different from conventional D-shaped finishing spot, the low M s also results in a shuttle-like spot because the magnetic controllability is weak and particles in the fringe of spot are loose. The surface texture as well as figure accuracy and PSD1 (power spectrum density) of potassium dihydrogen phosphate (KDP) is greatly improved after MRF, which clearly prove the feasibility of substituting CIP and abrasive with Fe3O4 in our novel MRF design.Entities:
Keywords: Fe3O4; KDP; Magnetorheological finishing
Year: 2016 PMID: 26858161 PMCID: PMC4747954 DOI: 10.1186/s11671-016-1301-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Fig. 1SEM image of CIPs
Fig. 2TEM image of Fe3O4 nanoparticles
Fig. 3The hysteresis loops of Fe3O4 and CIP
Fig. 4The sketch map of conventional CIP and abrasive which are substituted by Fe3O4 nanoparticles simultaneously
Fig. 5The 2D (a)/3D (b) morphologies and horizontal (c)/vertical (d) profiles of the finishing spot
Fig. 6The 3D surface texture of the finished KDP with the fluid containing CIP (a) and Fe3O4 (c). b and d are the corresponding magnifications, respectively
Fig. 7The KDP figure accuracy of PV and PSD1 before (a, b) and after (c, d) finishing