Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1 s2.0 S221282711501166X Main PDF
1 s2.0 S221282711501166X Main PDF
1 s2.0 S221282711501166X Main PDF
com
ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 41 (2016) 841 846
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0812399231; fax: +39 0817682362. E-mail address: daddona@unina.it
Abstract
Hard turning process is currently replacing the conventional grinding operations in many industries. If properly designed, hard turning can give
equivalent results to grinding process in terms of accuracy and machined surface quality. Wiper inserts are being used in machining operations
because of their competence to generate superior machined surface. Surface roughness is major requirement for many industrial components
and is one of the important parameter considered to describe machinability of metals and metal alloys. This paper investigates performance of
wiper inserts in hard turning of oil hardening non-shrinking steel. The oil hardening non-shrinking steel is commonly used material for making
measuring instruments and gauges wherein surface roughness is very important aspect. The major emphasis here is given to study and compare
performance of wiper insert in terms of surface finish with conventional inserts. Influence of process parameters such as speed, feed, depth of
cut and nose radius (for wiper and conventional inserts) on surface roughness is analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and analysis of
means (AOM) plots. From the analysis, it can be clearly seen that wiper inserts produce a very good machined surface compared to
conventional inserts.
2015
2015 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier
Elsevier B.V.
B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of 48th CIRP Conference on MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS - CIRP CMS
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
2015.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of 48th CIRP Conference on MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS - CIRP CMS 2015
Keywords: Hard turning; surface roughness; wiper inserts; machining
2212-8271 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of 48th CIRP Conference on MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS - CIRP CMS 2015
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2015.12.087
842 D.M. DAddona and Sunil J. Raykar / Procedia CIRP 41 (2016) 841 846
C
1 0.8 960 0.08 0.1
(Conventional)
W
2 1.2 1500 0.15 0.3
(Wiper)
3 1800 0.2 1.5
0.7
Mean of Surafce Roughness
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
Table 3. ANOVA for surface roughness. Cutting speed and nose radius do not show statistically
significant effect on surface roughness. From equation (1), it
Seq Adj Adj can be seen that as nose radius increase improved surface
Source DF F P
SS SS MS
4.42 roughness can be achieved. Current investigation depicts the
Insert 1 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.05 same trend. From AOM plot, it can be clearly seen that there
Nose is considerable decrease in surface roughness when nose
Radius 1 0.13 0.13 0.13 1.74 0.20
(mm)
radius changes. For 1.2 mm nose radius, results are more
Speed 2 favorable for surface roughness. Change in speed (RPM) does
0.08 0.08 0.04 0.54 0.59
(rpm) not have much influence on surface roughness.
Feed Surface plots are drawn to see effect of combination of
2 1.56 1.56 0.78 10.44 0.00
(mm/rev)
DoC
some of the parameters on surface roughness (Fig 6 - 8 ).
2 0.56 0.56 0.28 3.76 0.04 From surface plots, it can be observed that for combination
(mm)
Error 27 2.02 2.02 0.07 smaller feed i.e. 0.08 mm and both nose radius i.e. 0.8 and 1.2
mm surface roughness is good. For the selected speed range
Total 35 4.69 i.e. 960-1400 RPM and smaller feed i.e. 0.08 mm/rev surface
roughness values are favorable. For all selected depth of cuts
The ANOVA and AOM results for surface roughness data and smaller feed rate, surface roughness shows a good trend.
(Ra) showed that feed, depth of cut and type of insert are the Therefore from AOM and surface plots, the favorable cutting
statistically significant parameters which affects surface conditions to achieve good surface roughness are wiper
roughness (Fig. 3 and Table 3). Feed (P value = 0.000) was geometry, nose radius = 1.2 mm, speed = 1200 RPM, feed =
the most significant parameter having maximum contribution. 0.08 mm/rev. and DoC = 0.1 mm.
Depth of cut and type of insert are other parameters which
affected the surface roughness significantly but contributed
less than the feed. Type of insert and DoC are 2nd & 3rd
significant parameters respectively. Cutting speed and nose
radius are the parameters which affect the surface roughness
but not significant because P value of them are greater than
0.05.
From the ANOVA of surface roughness it is observed that
only feed rate affects the surface roughness significantly. An
increase in the feed rate increases the surface roughness,
which is known from the fundamentals of metal cutting.
(1)
(Nose radius = 1.2 mm, speed = 960 RPM, feed = 0.15 mm/rev and obtained by wiper insert is comparable with the surface
DoC = 0.5 mm) quality obtained by grinding operation (Table 4).
Fig .6. Surface plot of Ra (m) vs. feed (mm/rev) and nose radius (mm)
Conclusions
The results obtained from the current investigation are [1] Poulachon G, Bandyopadhyay BP, Jawahir IS, Pheulpin S, Seguin E.
implemented in actual industrial practice to see and compare Wear behavior of CBN tools while turning various hardened steels. Wear
the surface finish quality while machining a pin with 2004: 302310.
conventional insert, wiper insert (with nose radius 0.8 mm) [2] Oliveira AJ, Diniz AE, Ursolino DJ. Hard turning in continuous and
interrupted cut with PCBN and whisker-reinforced cutting tools. Journal
and grinding operation. The grinding process is the actual
of Materials Processing Technology 2009; 209: 52625270.
process used by the reference industry to finish the [3] Bartarya G, Choudhury SK. State of the art in hard turning.International
component. The result indicates that surface finish quality Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 2012; 53: 114.
846 D.M. DAddona and Sunil J. Raykar / Procedia CIRP 41 (2016) 841 846
[4] http://www.sandvik.coromant.com / enb / knowledge [7] Raykar SJ, D'Addona DM, Kramar D. Analysis of Surface Topology in
/general_turning,A.O,4/2/2015,2.20 pm (I.S.T). Dry Machining of EN-8 Steel. 3rd International Conference on Materials
[5] Elbah M, Yallese MA, Aouici H, Mabrouki T, Rigal JF. Comparative Processing and Characterisation - ICMPC 2014; Procedia Materials
assessment of wiper and conventional ceramic tools on surface roughness Science 2014; 6: 931 938.
in hard turning AISI 4140 steel. Measurement 2013; 46: 30413056. [8] Hessainia Z, Belbah A, Yallese MA, Mabrouki T, Rigal JF. On the
[6] Correia AE, Davim JP. Surface roughness measurement in turning carbon prediction of surface roughness in the hard turning based on cutting
steel AISI 1045 using wiper inserts. Measurement 2011; 44: 10001005. parameters and tool vibrations. Measurement 2013; 46: 16711681.