| Literature DB >> 30978918 |
Daniel Grochała1, Stefan Berczyński2, Zenon Grządziel3.
Abstract
The production of modern machines requires parts with much greater geometric accuracy and surface geometry (SG) precision than several years ago. These requirements are met by so-called hybrid technologies that must simultaneously be inexpensive to implement. The integration of treatment procedures (usually in one operation) is geared towards achieving a synergistic effect. Combining different treatments from various technologies produces synergy, i.e., benefits greater than the optimization of each individual process done separately. This paper presents experimental results and numerical experiment data on surface plastic deformation. The hybrid technology used in the study was a combination of milling and finishing with plastic burnishing using a ceramic ball. These processes were integrated on a multi-axis CNC machining center. The plastic deformations of real surfaces were determined in simulations. The paper also discusses the structure of the model and how to use it to conduct a finite element method (FEM) computer simulation. The aim of the study was to determine how to use the potential developed model of hybrid treatment to predict the surface performance expressed by the amplitude, volume, and functional parameters of the surface geometry, with the EN-ISO 25178-2 profile.Entities:
Keywords: FEM modeling; burnishing by ceramic ball; hybrid machining; milling; surface geometry
Year: 2019 PMID: 30978918 PMCID: PMC6479330 DOI: 10.3390/ma12071179
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1(a) Surface obtained after milling; (b) Surface after milling and burnishing.
Selected 3D surface geometry (SG) parameters recorded in experiments.
| SG Parameters in Compliance with EN-ISO 25178 | After Milling | After Burnishing | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter Name | Parameter Description | Context | Unit | ||
| Sa | Surface height arithmetic mean | µm | 1.89 | 1.70 | |
| Sz | Maximum surface height | µm | 14.40 | 11.90 | |
| Sq | Root mean squared surface height | µm | 2.33 | 1.94 | |
| Ssk | Surface asymmetry | 0.42 | −0.46 | ||
| Sku | Surface kurtosis | 2.67 | 1.96 | ||
| Sp | Surface peak maximum height | µm | 9.05 | 5.45 | |
| Sv | Surface valley maximum height | µm | 5.38 | 6.49 | |
|
| |||||
| Sk | Core roughness depth | Gaussian filter, 0.08 mm | µm | 1.03 | 0.15 |
| Spk | Reduced summit height | Gaussian filter, 0.08 mm | µm | 0.53 | 0.13 |
| Svk | Reduced valley depth | Gaussian filter, 0.08 mm | µm | 0.57 | 0.18 |
Figure 2Randomly selected profile used to model burnishing.
Figure 3Randomly selected benchmark profile obtained in burnishing experimental research.
Selected 2D SG parameters recorded in experiments.
| SG Parameters in Compliance with EN-ISO 4287 | After Milling | After Burnishing | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter Name | Parameter Description | Context | Unit | ||
|
| |||||
| Pa | Arithmetic mean deviation of primary profile | µm | 1.56 | 0.527 | |
| Pt | Total height of primary profile | µm | 5.72 | 3.28 | |
| Pz | Maximum height of primary profile | µm | 5.72 | 3.28 | |
| Pq | Root mean squared deviation of primary profile | µm | 1.75 | 0.65 | |
| Pp | Maximum peak height of primary profile | µm | 2.61 | 1.06 | |
| Pv | Maximum valley depth of primary profile | µm | 3.10 | 2.22 | |
| Psk | Primary profile asymmetry | −0.29 | −1.27 | ||
| Pku | Primary profile kurtosis | 1.72 | 3.59 | ||
|
| |||||
| Ra | Arithmetic mean deviation of roughness profile | Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | µm | 1.07 | 0.30 |
| Rt | Total height of roughness profile | Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | µm | 3.29 | 1.92 |
| Rz | Maximum height of roughness profile | Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | µm | 3.29 | 1.92 |
| Rq | Root mean square deviation of roughness profile | Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | µm | 1.15 | 0.38 |
| Rp | Maximum peak height of roughness profile | Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | µm | 1.78 | 0.58 |
| Rv | Maximum valley depth of roughness profile | Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | µm | 1.50 | 1.35 |
| Rsk | Roughness profile asymmetry | Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | 0.24 | −1.02 | |
| Rku | Roughness profile kurtosis | Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | 1.38 | 3.42 | |
|
| |||||
| Rmr | Relative material balance of roughness profile | c = 1 µm under the highest peak, Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | % | 35.90 | 81.50 |
| Rdc | Height difference of roughness profile parts | p = 20%, q = 80%, Gaussian filter, 0.8 mm | µm | 2.36 | 0.66 |
Figure 4Model of surface burnishing developed in a finite element model (FEM) environment.
Figure 5Sample prepared for Nastran FX simulations.
Properties of the steel X42CrMo4, used in experiments (35 HRC) [6].
| Parameter | Symbol | Unit | Catalogue Data for 20–24 HRC | Average Value in Tensile Tests 35 ± 1 HRC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Longitudinal modulus of elasticity | EX | GPa | 210 | 210.2 |
| Poisson’s ratio | NUXY | - | 0.28 | 0.28 |
| Longitudinal modulus of elasticity | GXY | N/m2 | 7.9 × 1010 | - |
| Tensile strength | SIGXT | GPa | 1.000 | 1.046 |
| Yield strength | SIGYLD | MPa | 750 | 840 |
| Coefficient of thermal expansion | ALPX | /K | 1.1 × 10−5 | - |
| Elongation | A | % | 14.7 | 10.86 |
Figure 6Sample model at contact point when ball is rolled back on real surface.
Figure 7Plastic deformation of sample after one pass of the burnishing tool with a force of 500 N.
Selected roughness parameters recorded in the study.
| EN-ISO 4287 | Amplitude Parameters—Primary Profile | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unit | Milled Surface | Empirical Experiment | Numerical Experiment | Difference [%] | |
| Pa | µm | 1.56 | 0.52 | 0.55 | 4.4 |
| Pt | µm | 5.72 | 3.28 | 2.77 | 18.4 |
| Pz | µm | 5.72 | 3.28 | 2.77 | 18.4 |
| Pq | µm | 1.75 | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.8 |
| Pp | µm | 2.61 | 1.06 | 1.41 | 33.0 |
| Pv | µm | 3.10 | 2.22 | 1.36 | 63.2 |
|
| |||||
| Ra | µm | 1.07 | 0.303 | 0.33 | 8.3 |
| Rt | µm | 3.29 | 1.92 | 1.38 | 39.1 |
| Rz | µm | 3.29 | 1.92 | 1.38 | 39.1 |
| Rq | µm | 1.15 | 0.39 | 0.39 | 0.3 |
| Rp | µm | 1.78 | 0.58 | 0.70 | 21.1 |
| Rv | µm | 1.50 | 1.35 | 0.68 | 97.9 |
|
| |||||
| Rmr | % | 35.90 | 81.5 | 72.50 | 12.4 |
| Rdc | µm | 2.36 | 0.66 | 0.82 | 25.1 |
Figure 8Milled surface profile after the simulation of a burnishing process with Nastran FX.
Figure 9Graphs show surface profile after milling, solid deformation in investigated profile and final profile after burnishing with a force of 500 N.
Figure 10Changes in 2D SG parameters in the unfiltered profile.
Figure 11Changes in 2D SG parameters in roughness profile (profile filtered in compliance with EN-ISO 4287).