| Literature DB >> 33946885 |
Jianxiao Bian1,2, Baoji Ma1,3, Haihong Ai1, Lijun Qi1.
Abstract
Different cathode materials have different surface chemical components and machining capacities, which may finally result in different machining quality and machining efficiency of workpieces. In this paper, in order to investigate the influence of cathode materials on the electrochemical machining of thin-walled workpiece made of 304 stainless steel, five cylindrical electrodes are used as the target working cathodes of electrochemical machining to conduct experiments and research, including 45# steel, 304 stainless steel, aluminum alloy 6061, brass H62, and tungsten steel YK15. The stray current corrosion, taper, and material removal rate were used as the criteria to evaluate the drilling quality of efficiency of a thin-walled workpiece made of 304 stainless steel. The research results show that from the perspectives of stray current corrosion and taper, aluminum alloy 6061 is an optimal tool cathode, which should be used in the electrochemical machining of thin-walled workpieces made of 304 stainless steel; on the aspect of material removal rate, the 45# steel, 304 stainless steel, and aluminum alloy 6061 present close material removal rates, all of which are higher than that of brass H62 and tungsten steel YK15. Based on comprehensive consideration of both machining quality and machining efficiency, the aluminum alloy 6061 is the best option as the cathode tool in the electrochemical machining of thin-walled workpieces made of 304 stainless steel.Entities:
Keywords: cathode material; electrochemical machining; machining quality; oxide film; stray current corrosion
Year: 2021 PMID: 33946885 PMCID: PMC8124585 DOI: 10.3390/ma14092311
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Schematic diagram of electrochemical machining.
Figure 2Finite element model.
Parameters and values of simulation model and experiments.
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| Cathode material | H62 brass|6061 aluminum|304 stainless steel |
| Anode material | 304 stainless steel |
| Cathode size (mm) |
|
| Anode size (mm) | 25 × 25 × 0.3 |
| Electrolyte | 1 mol/L NaNO3 + 0.1 mol/L C6H8O7 |
| Cathode potential (V) | 10 |
| Anode potential (V) | 0 |
| Initial interelectrode gap (IEG) (mm) | 0.2 |
| Electrolyte conductivity (S/m) | 1.542 |
| Temperature (°C) | 20 |
| Spindle speed (rpm) | 3000 |
| Feed speed (μm/s) | 1.0 |
| Workpiece thickness(mm) | 0.3 |
Figure 3Current density distribution on anode surface with different cathode materials: (a) 45# steel; (c) 304 stainless steel; (e) aluminum alloy 6061; (g) brass H62; (i) tungsten steel YK15. Electric field distribution on anode surface with different cathode materials: (b) 45# steel; (d) 304 stainless steel; (f) aluminum alloy 6061; (h) brass H62; (j) tungsten steel YK15.
Figure 4SEM images of the surface before machining with the 304 stainless steel anode when different cathode material was used: (a) 45# steel; (c) 304 stainless steel; (e) aluminum alloy 6061; (g) brass H62; (i) tungsten steel YK15. SEM images of upper hole with the 304 stainless steel anode when different cathode material was used: (b) 45# steel; (d) 304 stainless steel; (f) aluminum alloy 6061; (h) brass H62; (j) tungsten steel YK15.
Figure 5(a) The influence of tool cathode type on hole taper; (b) 2D profiles of corresponding holes of different cathode materials.
Figure 6Chemical components of different cathode materials and their contents: (a) 45# steel; (b) 304 stainless steel; (c) aluminum alloy 6061; (d) brass H62; (e) tungsten steel YK15; (f) material removal rate of corresponding anode workpiece made of 304 stainless steel with different cathode materials.