| Literature DB >> 31514319 |
Martin A Aulestia Viera1, Paulo R Aguiar2, Pedro Oliveira Junior2, Felipe A Alexandre2, Wenderson N Lopes2, Eduardo C Bianchi3, Rosemar Batista da Silva4, Doriana D'addona5, Andre Andreoli2.
Abstract
Innovative monitoring systems based on sensor signals have emerged in recent years in view of their potential for diagnosing machining process conditions. In this context, preliminary applications of fast-response and low-cost piezoelectric diaphragms (PZT) have recently emerged in the grinding monitoring field. However, there is a lack of application regarding the grinding of ceramic materials. Thus, this work presents an analysis of the feasibility of using the acoustic emission signals obtained through the PZT diaphragm, together with digital signal processing in the time-frequency domain, in the monitoring of the surface quality of ceramic components during the surface grinding process. For comparative purpose, an acoustic emission (AE) sensor, commonly used in industry, was used as a baseline. The results obtained by the PZT diaphragm were similar to the results obtained using the AE sensor. The time-frequency analysis allowed to identify irregularities throughout the monitored process.Entities:
Keywords: acoustic emission; ceramic grinding; digital signal processing; piezoelectric transducer; sensor monitoring; short-time Fourier transform
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31514319 PMCID: PMC6767319 DOI: 10.3390/s19183913
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Murata piezoelectric sensor 7BB-35-3 used in the tests.
Grinding parameters.
|
| |
| Cutting speed ( | 33 m/s |
| Worktable speed ( | 58 mm/s |
| Depth of cut (µm) | 25–35–50–105–150–210–350 |
|
| |
| Fluid | Shell–DMS 3200 F-1 |
| Flow rate | 27.5 L/min |
| Pressure | <0.7 MPa |
| Concentration | 4% oil-water |
Figure 2Experimental setup.
Figure 3Confocal microscopy: (a) Without cutting; (b) 25 µm; (c) 35 µm; (d) 50 µm; (e) 105 µm; (f) 150 µm; (g) 210 µm; and (h) 350 µm.
Mean surface roughness (Ra) measured with a portable roughness tester.
| Depth of Cut (a-µm) | Surface Roughness (Ra-µm) |
|---|---|
| 25 | 0.516 ± 0.027 |
| 35 | 0.620 ± 0.033 |
| 50 | 0.647 ± 0.037 |
| 105 | 0.684 ± 0.040 |
| 150 | 0.697 ± 0.042 |
| 210 | 0.736 ± 0.051 |
| 350 | 0.793 ± 0.055 |
Figure 4Short-time Fourier transform (STFT) spectrograms.
Figure 5The ratio of power (ROP) of the (a) acoustic emission sensor (AE) and (b) piezoelectric diaphragm (PZT).
Figure 6Magnitude-squared coherence between the AE sensor and PZT diaphragm at three grinding conditions.
Figure 7Correlation between ROP and surface roughness for both sensors.