| Literature DB >> 31817116 |
Minghuan Wang1, Yongchao Shang1, Kailei He1, Xuefeng Xu1, Guoda Chen1.
Abstract
Microstructures on metal surfaces with diameters of tens to hundreds of micrometers and depths of several micrometers to tens of micrometers can improve the performance of engineering parts. Air-shielding electrochemical micromachining (AS-EMM) is a promising method for fabricating these microstructures, owing to its advantage of high efficient and better localization. However, the machining performance is often influenced by the machining or nonmachining parameters in AS-EMM. In order to get a better machining result in AS-EMM, the optimization of AS-EMM, including nozzle inclination and process parameters, was studied in this paper. Firstly, nozzle inclination was optimized by the different selected air incidence angles (θ) in simulation, and θ = π/4 was advised. Then, the grey relational analysis based on the orthogonal test method was used to analyze the grey relational grade for parameters and obtain the optimal parameter combination, i.e., at electrolyte velocity 5.5 m/s, gas velocity 160 m/s, and voltage 8 V. Finally, the optimization result was verified experimentally.Entities:
Keywords: air-shielding electrochemical micro-machining; flow field; grey relational analysis; nozzle design; optimization
Year: 2019 PMID: 31817116 PMCID: PMC6953039 DOI: 10.3390/mi10120846
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Figure 1Schematic of (a) air-shielding electrochemical micromachining (AS-EMM) experimental set-up; (b) nozzle structure; (c) the flow field in interelectrode gap; (d) research zone.
Figure 2The structure model in the flow field.
Figure 3Contours of void fraction (air) in flow field by simulation at different incidence angles (θ): (a) No compressed air; (b) θ = π/2; (c) θ = π/3; (d) θ = π/4; (e) θ = π/6.
Figure 4The extracted void fraction (air) (Y = 4, 0 < X < 2) at different incidence angles.
Figure 5The electrolyte flow velocity in the interelectrode gap (IEG) in simulation at different incidence angles (θ): (a) No compressed air; (b) θ = π/2; (c) θ = π/3; (d) θ = π/4; (e) θ = π/6.
Figure 6Graphs of velocity along the Y axis (X = 0) at different incidence angles (θ).
Parameters and their levels.
| Factors | Symbol | Unit | Levels | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| Electrolyte velocity | A | m/s | 4 | 4.5 | 5 | 5.5 |
| Gas velocity | B | m/s | 0 | 80 | 120 | 160 |
| Voltage | C | V | 6 | 8 | 10 | 12 |
Parameters of experiment.
| Parameters | Value |
|---|---|
| Machining gap | 15 μm |
| Feed rate | 60 μm·min−1 |
| Electrode diameter | 50 μm |
| Electrolyte concentration | 10% NaNO3 |
| Machining time | 30 s |
| Duty ratio | 50% |
| Frequency | 100 kHz |
| Air incidence angle | π/4 |
Figure 7Morphology of machining results.
The detected machining results.
| Exp. No | A | B | C |
|
| Exp. No | A | B | C |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.064 | 0.116 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0.176 | 0.113 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0.099 | 0.121 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 0.190 | 0.167 |
| 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 0.184 | 0.128 | 11 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0.132 | 0.139 |
| 4 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 0.174 | 0.152 | 12 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 0.219 | 0.081 |
| 5 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0.140 | 0.139 | 13 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 0.215 | 0.187 |
| 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0.126 | 0.097 | 14 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 0.196 | 0.159 |
| 7 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 0.188 | 0.138 | 15 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0.204 | 0.072 |
| 8 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 0.201 | 0.136 | 16 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0.181 | 0.043 |
Dimensionless experimental results.
| Exp. No | Reference Sequence | Exp. No | Reference Sequence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 1 | 0.000 | 0.493 | 9 | 0.724 | 0.514 |
| 2 | 0.225 | 0.458 | 10 | 0.811 | 0.139 |
| 3 | 0.772 | 0.410 | 11 | 0.438 | 0.333 |
| 4 | 0.711 | 0.243 | 12 | 1.000 | 0.736 |
| 5 | 0.491 | 0.333 | 13 | 0.977 | 0.000 |
| 6 | 0.397 | 0.625 | 14 | 0.853 | 0.194 |
| 7 | 0.797 | 0.340 | 15 | 0.901 | 0.799 |
| 8 | 0.886 | 0.354 | 16 | 0.752 | 1.000 |
Grey relational coefficient and grey relational grade.
| Exp. No | GRC | GRG | Rank | Exp. No | GRC | GRG | Rank | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| λ |
| λ |
| ||||||
| 1 | 0.3333 | 0.4966 | 0.4149 | 16 | 9 | 0.6443 | 0.4286 | 0.5364 | 11 |
| 2 | 0.3920 | 0.4800 | 0.4360 | 15 | 10 | 0.7257 | 0.4513 | 0.5885 | 7 |
| 3 | 0.6864 | 0.4586 | 0.5725 | 8 | 11 | 0.4709 | 0.6145 | 0.5427 | 10 |
| 4 | 0.6340 | 0.3978 | 0.5159 | 12 | 12 | 1.0000 | 0.5774 | 0.7887 | 1 |
| 5 | 0.4954 | 0.4286 | 0.4620 | 14 | 13 | 0.9565 | 0.4977 | 0.7271 | 3 |
| 6 | 0.4534 | 0.5714 | 0.5124 | 13 | 14 | 0.7725 | 0.4777 | 0.6251 | 6 |
| 7 | 0.7115 | 0.4311 | 0.5713 | 9 | 15 | 0.8345 | 0.6341 | 0.7343 | 2 |
| 8 | 0.8145 | 0.4364 | 0.6254 | 5 | 16 | 0.6686 | 0.7294 | 0.6990 | 4 |
Figure 8Mean grey relational grade of each parameter on machining results.
Figure 9Micro pits machined using parameter combination of (a) group 12 and (b) the optimum group.