Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Received 15 March 1978
Received 15 March 1978
Abstract - An analysis of material removal in ultrasonic machining considering direct impact of abrasive grains on
the workpiece is presented. Non-uniformity of abrasive grains is considered by using a probability distribution for
the diameter of the abrasive particles as suggested by Rozenberg. The analysis is applied to calculate material
removal rate for the case of glass using 400 mesh Norbide abrasive and mild steel tool for various values of static
force and amplitude of tool oscillation.
NOMENCLATURE
ao amplitude of vibration
D diameter of tool
d diameter of abrasive particle
d mean diameter of abrasive
dm maximum diameter of abrasive particles of a particular mesh size
do minimum diameter of abrasive particles of a particular mesh
f frequency of vibration
F~ contact load on a grit
e~ static load
e(d) frequency distribution of abrasive particles
H~ hardness of tool
H~ hardness of workpiece
h depth of indentation
Me impulse due to contact with grains
M, impulse due to static load
N total number of abrasive particles in the gap
N, total number of abrasive particles in the gap at time t
q = Hw/H ,; hardness ratio
rw radius of the indentation zone in workpiece
Vo volume fractured per grit
Vd metal removal rate due to all the particles of size d
Vg volume of working gap
total metal removal rate
x distance between tool and work at end of stroke
Xt distance between the tool and work at time 't"
Y~ distance of tool from its mean position at start of impact
W average weight of abrasive particles
w, weight of abrasive in the gap at time t
w~ weight of an abrasive particle of diameter d
depth of indentation in tool
depth of indentation in workpiece
0 angular position of tool
P~ density of abrasive particles
Pl density of fluid carrying abrasive
gO frequency in rad/sec.
1. I N T R O D U C T I O N
ULTRASONIC machining is one of the methods used for machining hard materials, e.g.
tungsten and titanium carbides, die and tool steels, and brittle materials such as germanium,
silicon, ferrites, ceramics, glass, and quartz.
In ultrasonic machining the material is removed primarily by blows from hard abrasive
grains. The abrasive particles are under the control of a tool which is vibrated at an ultrasonic
33
34 G.S. KAINTH, AMITAVNANDY and KULDEEPSINGH
frequency with a small amplitude. A continuous flow of abrasive slurry flushes away particles
removed in the process. This also enables fresh abrasive grains to replace the particles which
fracture in the process. As the tool vibrates at a high frequency and a large number of particles
are active at a time, the rate of material removal is sufficient for practical purposes.
Miller [1] in his semi-quantitative discussion on the rate of cutting in ultrasonic machining
assumed that the rate of material removal depends upon work-hardening and plastic
deformation of the workpiece. This implies that his analysis is mostly applicable to plastic
materials, however, most of the materials machined by ultrasonic machining are brittle.
Moreover, he also assumed that all the grains are cubes of the same size and that all the grains
take part in cutting.
Shaw [2] assumed that material is removed primarily by two mechanisms due to
(a) direct impact of the tool on the grains in contact with the workpiece and tool, and
(b) impact of grains accelerated by the vibrating tool.
He showed that only a small fraction of material removed is due to the impact of moving
grains and the bulk of the material is removed by direct impact of the tool. He assumed that
the rate of material removal "v" is proportional to the volume V of material dislodged per
impact, the number of particles N making impact per cycle and the frequency of tool
vibration "f". Assuming the grains to be identical spheres of mean grain diameter d, Shaw
expressed the material removal rate as:
v oc [dh]3/2Nf, (1)
where h is the depth of indentation. The depth of indentation was found by equating the mean
static force to the mean force of impact of the tool on the grains. Assuming that the number of
particles in the working gap is inversely proportional to the square of the diameter of each of
the particles for a tool of fixed area, he [2] gave the following expression for h:
where, aY is the mean diameter of the particles in the working gap and
N is the number of particles in the working gap.
Material Removal in Ultrasonic Machining 35
2. T H E O R E T I C A L A N A L Y S I S O F M A T E R I A L R E M O V A L RATE
A theoretical analysis of the material removal rate in ultrasonic machining is made
considering direct impact of abrasive grains on the workpiece. The inhomogeneity in the size
of grains is taken into account by using the statistical distribution given by Rozenberg [7].
The grains are assumed to be spherical.
MEAN POSITION m
z ANGLE
OF TOOL
F TOOL
1
0o WORK
Workpiec~l/
where F(d) gives the number of particles of size d from equation (3).
The active grains taking part in material removal process are those having diameters
between x (the distance between the tool and the workpiece) and dm (the maximum diameter
of the abrasive grains). Hence, the total material removal rate v, considering all the effective
particles, is :
(6wd)3'2[1.o95N{1-(d-lf}3]fdd.
,=ff
Substituting for 6w from equation 03) we get:
2.29Nf ; " [ (_~)2~
v - (1 + q)3/2j [(d - x)d] 1 - - 1 dd. (14)
The number of particles in the working gap at any instant of time t is:
N, = W f f W , (17)
where W is the average weight of the abrasive particles.
The weight of an abrasive particle of diameter d is:
W a = (n/6)d3pa .
(18)
(19)
Nt- C TcD2(o'~Pa)[flfx(i
l -- C
-~ "
Pt + ~
a. ) 21 3]dd "
oda 1- -1
38 G.S. KAINTH, AMITAVNANDY and KULDEEP SINGH
The average working gap during the period between the instant when the tool touches the
largest abrasive grain and the time when it stops at a distance x from the workpiece is
/~n/2
= 1. [(x + ao) - a o sin O]dO/(n/2 - Os),
F, = rtdHw6~,F(d)dd, (24)
t
where 6~t is the indentation in the workpiece at a time t for a particle of size d and is given by
6w, = (d - x,)/(l + q). (25)
Hence, the contact force is given as:
" d(d - x,)
F. =
ffi
rrHw 1 + ~ F(d)dd. (26)
The impulse due to the contact force during the contact period from 0s to M2 is
Me = - - 1 f,q2~f, nH w
d(d_xO
-
1.095N • [ 1 - (~ - 1
)2~ dd.dO. (27)
to ao. , l+q d
Equating the static force impulse M s to the contact force impulse Me, we get
Substituting for xf from equation (20), the integral in equation (28) can be solved to give an
expression in terms of x, din, and d.
Equations (22) and (28) can then be solved for N and x to calculate the machining rate from
equation (14).
Material Removalin Ultrasonic Machining 39
.c
2
A
c
~2
E
v 2
ill:
I
t.9
z
_z
-r
c.)
2 4 6 8 XO.I
STATIC LOAD (Kg)
FIG. 3. Variationof machiningrate with static load.
40 G. S. KAINTH, A M I T A V N A N D Y and K U L D E E P SINGH
t~
to
E
E
taJ 2
cc
Z
Z
"I"
<J
I E ,3 ~ :~ b f xu.OI
AMPLITUDE (ram)
I I I I
ol W o r k - piece:- gloss I
x
°- Tool - diameter :- 12.7 m m ' I ,!
71 Frequency :- 25.5 Kc/sec| / ,
- - C o n c e n t r a t i o n :- O. 1 6 8 J ~ -J ] --
Abrosive:-boron c o r b i d e / / /~ /
A m p l i t u d e : - 0.0625 mm ~ J
6 - - Stotic Iood :- 0.93 Kg - ~ - ~ ~ .--
E ! , ,
z
"1-
, 6 8 Io
i 12 14 xo.o~
MEAN SIZE OF ABRASIVE PARTICLES(ram)
I I I I I I I
500 320 240 180 15o 120 I00
CORRESPONDING MESH SIZE
FIG. 5. Variation of machining rate with mean size of abrasive particles (mesh size).
quantitative evaluation of machining rate using material properties of tool and workpiece
whereas this is not possible with the earlier theories.
A limited comparison with the experimental results in the existing literature shows that the
proposed theory predicts machining rates which are an order higher than the practical
values. Even though the theory does predict an increase in machining rate with increase in
static load, tool amplitude and size of abrasive grain, the theory does not predict a drop in
machining rate after optimum values of static load and abrasive size are reached.
Material Removal in Ultrasonic Machining 41
Acknowledoements - The authors are thankful to Mr. Uma Raman Pandey for typing the manuscript of this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] G. E. MILLER,J. Appl. Phys. 28, 149 (1957).
[2] M. C. SHAW, Microtechnic 10, 165 (1956).
[3] L. D. ROZENaERGand V. F. KAZENTSEV,Docklady Aklad, Nauk SSSR 124, 79 (1959).
[4] V. I. DIKtJSmN and V. N. BARr,E, Stanki i Instrument 5, l0 (1958).
[5] V. N. BARKE,Dissertation, Moscow Machine Tool Institute (1958).
[6] V. F. KAZANTSEV,Machines and Tooling 34, 14 (1963).
[7] L D. ROZEr~BERG,Ultrasonic Cutting, Consultants Bureau, New York, 1964.
[8] G. NISHIMURA,Y. JIMBOand S. SHIMAKAWA,J. Fac. Engng Tokyo Univ. 24, 65 (1955)i