| Literature DB >> 32331395 |
Rosario Domingo1, Beatriz de Agustina1, Marta María Marín1.
Abstract
This study is focused on the application of a cooling compressed air system in drilling processes; this environmentally friendly technique allows removing material at very low temperatures, approximately up to -22 °C in the cutting area. The main goals are to find the most improve cutting conditions with less energy consumption, for the drilling of reinforced polyether-ether-ketone with glass fiber at 30% (PEEK-GF30) with cooling compressed air by a Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube, and to find a balance between environmental conditions and adequate process performance. Drilling tests were carried out on plates of PEEK-GF30 to analyze the influence of cutting parameters and environmental temperature (-22, 0 and 22 °C) on variables such as thrust forces, energy and material removed rate by the use of statistical methods; analysis of variance, analysis of means, response surface, and desirability function were employed to identify the optimum region that provides the most improved values of the aforementioned variables. Drill bit diameter was also analyzed to determine the quality of drilled holes. During the drilling processes, force signals were detected by a piezoelectric dynamometer connected to multichannel amplifier and a pyrometer was used to control the temperature. The diameters of the drilled holes were measured by a coordinate measuring machine. Cooling compressed air can be considered an adequate technique to improve the results from an environmental and efficient perspective; in particular, the maximum desirability function was found at a spindle speed of 7000 rpm, a feedrate of 1 mm/rev and a temperature close to -22 °C.Entities:
Keywords: PEEK-GF30; cooling compressed air; drilling; energy; material removed rate; multi-response optimization; sustainable manufacturing; thrust force
Year: 2020 PMID: 32331395 PMCID: PMC7215968 DOI: 10.3390/ma13081965
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Drill bits characteristics.
| Material | Coating | Point Angle | Flute Helix Angle | Number of Cutting Edges | Nominal Tolerance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drill bit | Solid carbide | Zirconium oxide | 140° | 15° | 2 | h7 |
Figure 1Machining process and data collection: (a) Scheme of assembly to drilling process and data capture; (b) Outlet of cold fluid after 8 minutes, with ice in the exterior.
Figure 2Measurement process of diameters: (a) Scheme of determination of center and circle of least square; (b) Coordinate measuring machine, during the measurement process of diameters.
Experimental results.
| No. Test | T (°C) | N (rpm) | f (mm/rev) | Ft (N) | E (J) | MRR (mm3/s) | Di (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | −22 | 5000 | 0.5 | 47.12 | 10.67 | 1178.10 | 5.960 |
| 2 | 0 | 5000 | 0.5 | 81.32 | 12.83 | 1178.10 | 5.933 |
| 3 | 22 | 5000 | 0.5 | 59.15 | 16.28 | 1178.10 | 5.987 |
| 4 | −22 | 6000 | 0.5 | 38.68 | 15.47 | 1413.72 | 5.943 |
| 5 | 0 | 6000 | 0.5 | 85.27 | 19.54 | 1413.72 | 5.913 |
| 6 | 22 | 6000 | 0.5 | 57.05 | 12.66 | 1413.72 | 5.987 |
| 7 | −22 | 7000 | 0.5 | 31.05 | 7.54 | 1649.34 | 5.950 |
| 8 | 0 | 7000 | 0.5 | 49.26 | 8.56 | 1649.34 | 5.977 |
| 9 | 22 | 7000 | 0.5 | 75.16 | 19.93 | 1649.34 | 5.940 |
| 10 | −22 | 5000 | 0.75 | 47.72 | 9.08 | 1767.15 | 5.973 |
| 11 | 0 | 5000 | 0.75 | 129.24 | 13.7 | 1767.15 | 5.907 |
| 12 | 22 | 5000 | 0.75 | 58.31 | 7.82 | 1767.15 | 5.953 |
| 13 | −22 | 6000 | 0.75 | 51.52 | 7.25 | 2120.57 | 5.987 |
| 14 | 0 | 6000 | 0.75 | 96.75 | 9.8 | 2120.57 | 5.930 |
| 15 | 22 | 6000 | 0.75 | 80.4 | 8.83 | 2120.57 | 5.967 |
| 16 | −22 | 7000 | 0.75 | 26.57 | 4.85 | 2474.00 | 5.933 |
| 17 | 0 | 7000 | 0.75 | 30.70 | 14.6 | 2474.00 | 5.937 |
| 18 | 22 | 7000 | 0.75 | 71.81 | 10.65 | 2474.00 | 5.940 |
| 19 | −22 | 5000 | 1 | 45.70 | 5.90 | 2356.19 | 5.947 |
| 20 | 0 | 5000 | 1 | 156.66 | 9.50 | 2356.19 | 5.947 |
| 21 | 22 | 5000 | 1 | 70.15 | 2.91 | 2356.19 | 6.000 |
| 22 | −22 | 6000 | 1 | 47.58 | 2.67 | 2827.43 | 5.967 |
| 23 | 0 | 6000 | 1 | 103.32 | 8.39 | 2827.43 | 5.933 |
| 24 | 22 | 6000 | 1 | 110.36 | 9.46 | 2827.43 | 5.970 |
| 25 | −22 | 7000 | 1 | 27.69 | 6.26 | 3298.67 | 5.957 |
| 26 | 0 | 7000 | 1 | 56.65 | 7.69 | 3298.67 | 5.960 |
| 27 | 22 | 7000 | 1 | 78.68 | 7.92 | 3298.67 | 5.927 |
Analysis of Variance for Ft.
| Source | Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F-Ratio | P-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T | 913.809 | 1 | 913.809 | 5.18 | 0.0461 |
| N | 6461.76 | 1 | 6461.76 | 36.63 | 0.0001 |
| f | 1524.32 | 1 | 1524.32 | 8.64 | 0.0148 |
| T2 | 5676.25 | 1 | 5676.25 | 32.18 | 0.0002 |
| T × N | 724.941 | 1 | 724.941 | 4.11 | 0.0701 |
| T × f | 338.247 | 1 | 338.247 | 1.92 | 0.1962 |
| N2 | 732.762 | 1 | 732.762 | 4.15 | 0.0689 |
| N × f | 498.843 | 1 | 498.843 | 2.83 | 0.1235 |
| f2 | 22.4396 | 1 | 22.4396 | 0.13 | 0.7287 |
| T2 × N | 5476.74 | 1 | 5476.74 | 31.05 | 0.0002 |
| T2 × f | 466.632 | 1 | 466.632 | 2.65 | 0.1349 |
| T × N2 | 29.6117 | 1 | 29.6117 | 0.17 | 0.6906 |
| T × N × f | 3.83645 | 1 | 3.83645 | 0.02 | 0.8857 |
| T × f2 | 52.1043 | 1 | 52.1043 | 0.30 | 0.5987 |
| N2 × f | 128.633 | 1 | 128.633 | 0.73 | 0.4131 |
| N × f2 | 139.122 | 1 | 139.122 | 0.79 | 0.3953 |
| Total residual | 1763.86 | 10 | 176.386 | ||
| Total | 26,038.0 | 26 |
Analysis of variance for E.
| Source | Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F-Ratio | P-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T | 5.15227 | 1 | 5.15227 | 0.53 | 0.4783 |
| N | 4.47207 | 1 | 4.47207 | 0.46 | 0.5084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| T × N | 28.49 | 1 | 28.49 | 2.92 | 0.1079 |
| T × f | 7.88941 | 1 | 7.88941 | 0.81 | 0.3825 |
| N × f | 4.45301 | 1 | 4.45301 | 0.46 | 0.5093 |
| T2 × N | 6.12562 | 1 | 6.12562 | 0.63 | 0.4402 |
| T2 × f | 7.7748 | 1 | 7.7748 | 0.80 | 0.3858 |
| T × N2 | 2.828 | 1 | 2.828 | 0.29 | 0.5980 |
| N2 × f | 9.68247 | 1 | 9.68247 | 0.99 | 0.3347 |
| Total residual | 146.171 | 15 | 9.74475 | ||
| Total | 506.569 | 26 |
Analysis of variance for material removed rate (MRR).
| Source | Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F-Ratio | P-Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| T2 | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| T × N | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| T × f | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| N2 | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| T2 × N | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| T2 × f | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| T × N2 | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| T × N × f | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| T × f2 | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| N2 × f | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| N × f2 | 0.0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0000 |
| Total residual | 3.78713 × 10−8 | 10 | 3.78713 × 10−9 | ||
| Total | 1.14086 × 107 | 26 |
Figure 3Input diameter executed at different temperatures and spindle speed, and with: (a) feedrate of 0.5 mm/rev; (b) feedrate of 0.75 mm/rev; (c) feedrate of 1 mm/rev.
Figure 4Estimation of response surface for thrust forces: (a) Temperature of 22 °C; (b) Temperature of 0 °C; (c) Temperature of −22 °C.
Figure 5Estimation of response surface for energy: (a) Temperature of 22 °C; (b) Temperature of 0 °C; (c) Temperature of −22 °C.
Figure 6Estimation of response surface for MRR, at 22 °C, 0 °C and −22 °C.
Values considered in the desirability function.
| Variable | Goal | Li | Ui |
|
| Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ft [N] | Minimize | 26.57 | 156.66 | 1 | – | 3 |
| E [J] | Minimize | 2.67 | 19.93 | 1 | – | 3 |
| MRR [mm3/s] | Maximize | 1178.10 | 3298.67 | – | 1 | 3 |
Figure 7Desirability function.
Figure 8Contours of estimated response surface for f = 1 mm/rev.