Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Grain Trajectory and Grain Workpiece Contact Analyses For Modeling of Grinding Force and Energy Partition
Grain Trajectory and Grain Workpiece Contact Analyses For Modeling of Grinding Force and Energy Partition
DOI 10.1007/s00170-013-5428-5
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Received: 9 May 2013 / Accepted: 15 October 2013 / Published online: 13 November 2013
# Springer-Verlag London 2013
Abstract To achieve controlled stress grinding and controlled Ax Real contact area (square millimeters)
grinding of the depth of modificative layer, coupled analysis A(x) Chip cross-section area
of grinding force and grinding heat is required. Therefore, this (square millimeters)
paper investigated grinding force and energy partition to lay a AΔ Contact area between wheel and
foundation for the coupled analysis. Firstly, a new grinding workpiece per divided segment
force model based on the analyses of grain trajectory and grain (square millimeters per segment)
workpiece contact. In the modeling of grinding force, critical a Range of distribution of grain diameters
grain indention depths for plowing and cutting were (millimeters; a =d max −d mean)
calculated and the grinding force models of a single grain ae Grinding depth (millimeters)
were established. This model can analyze the contributions b Grinding width (millimeters)
of sliding, plowing, and cutting to total grinding forces. d gx Grain diameter (millimeters)
Secondly, an energy partition model was established based d max Maximum grain diameter (millimeters)
on the analyses of grain trajectory and grain workpiece d mean Mean grain diameter (millimeters)
contact. In the modeling of energy partition, the real contact d min Minimum grain diameter (millimeters)
area ratio and the grain contact radius were calculated. Finally, ds Wheel diameter (millimeters)
experiments were pursued to validate the grinding force model E1 Elastic modulus of grain (megapascals)
by comparing the experimental measurements to the E2 Elastic modulus of workpiece
theoretical results. Comparisons showed reasonable (megapascals)
agreement quantitatively. E* equivalent elastic modulus
(megapascals)
Keywords Grinding . Grinding force . Grain trajectory F Total grinding force (newtons)
analysis . Energy partition F brinell Brinell indention force (newtons)
F cn,x , F ct,x Cutting force per grain (newtons)
Abbreviation F i , F ni , F ti Grinding force at l (newtons)
Al Real contact area at l (square F pn,x , F pt,x Plowing force per grain (newtons)
millimeters) F rn,x , F rt,x Sliding force per grain (newtons)
A ratiol Real contact area ratio at position l f(x) Probability density function of grain
diameter
H Hardness of the workpiece material
D. Wang : P. Ge (*) : W. Bi : J. Jiang
(Newtons per square millimeters)
School of Mechanical Engineering, Shandong University,
Jinan 250061, China h Grain protrusion height (millimeters)
e-mail: pqge@sdu.edu.cn h0 Minimum protrusion height of the grain
just contact with workpiece at l
P. Ge
(millimeters)
Key Laboratory of High-Efficiency and Clean Mechanical
Manufacture, Shandong University, Ministry of Education, h cu, max Maximum grain indention depth
Jinan 250061, China (millimeters)
2112 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 70:2111–2123
h cu, min, h plow, min Critical indention depths (millimeters) q gl Heat flux conducted into grains at
h cul, max Maximum indention depth of the grain position l (watts per square meter)
just contact with workpiece at l ql Heat flux generated at position l
(millimeters) (watts per square meter)
h cutl Grain indention depth at position l q wl Heat flux conducted into workpiece at
(millimeters) position l (watts per square meter)
h cutl, max Maximum grain indention depth at q wbl Heat flux that remains in the workpiece
position l (millimeters) at position l (watts per square)
h cut, min Minimum protrusion height among all R wg Energy partition to the workpiece
the cutting grains (millimeters) between grain and workpiece
h cut, max Maximum indention depth of a grain r gx Grain radius (millimeters)
(millimeters) ro Mean contact radius (millimeters)
h cutx Grain indention depth (millimeters), r ol Contact radius at position l
given by h cutx =h −h min (millimeters)
h fl Convection heat transfer coefficient of r ox Contact radius between a contacting
the fluid at position l grain and the workpiece (millimeters)
h max Maximum grain protrusion height T 0l Temperature rise of the workpiece at
(millimeters) position l (degrees Celsius)
h min Minimum grain protrusion height T initial Initial temperature of the fluid
(millimeters), (degrees Celsius)
calculated from h min =h max −h cu, max T∞ Ambient temperature
kg Thermal conductivity of grain (degrees Celsius)
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi (watts per millikelvin) V Grinding removal rate
ðkρcÞw Thermal properties of workpiece (cubic millimeters per second)
(joules per square meter second kelvin) V cut Volume of chips removed by all
l An arbitrary location of the cutting grains per unit time
the grinding zone (cubic millimeters per second)
lc Grinding zone length (millimeters) Vg Grain volume percentage
l con Real contact length of a grain vs Wheel speed (meters per second)
(millimeters) vw Workpiece speed
Δl Length of each divided segment (millimeters per minute)
(millimeters) x A variable (millimeters), defined by
Ns Number of grains per unit area d gx =d mean +x
(grains per square millimeter) α Effective attack angle (radians), given
N total Total number of grains passing through by α =arcos(1–2h cutx/d gx )
grinding zone per unit time β, γ, φ Friction, rake, and shear angles (radians)
(grains per second) Δ Interval between two adjacent grains
NΔ Number of grains in each divided (millimeters)
segment (grains per segment) δ The interference between grain profile
P(x) Probability density function of grain and workpiece profile (millimeters)
protrusion height ε chl Energy partition at position l to chips
p Mean contact pressure between grain ε fl Energy partition at position l to fluid
and workpiece (newtons per square ε gl Energy partition at position l to grains
millimeter) ε wbl Energy partition at position l to
pt Critical contact pressure between grain workpiece background
and workpiece (newtons per square ξ cut, ξ plow Coefficients linking critical indention
millimeter) depths with grain diameter
q chl Heat flux conducted into chips at μ Friction coefficient
position l (watts per square meter) τs Shear strength of the workpiece
q fl Heat flux transferred into the fluid by (megapascals)
convection at position l υ1 Poisson’s ratio of grain
(watts per square meter) υ2 Poisson’s ratio of workpiece
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 70:2111–2123 2113
2.2 Probability density function of grain protrusion height grains is Δ. Taking out the minimum volume Δ3, and the
equivalent number of grains in the volume is 1 (1/8×8=1).
Figure 1 shows the protrusion height of the grains on the According to the definition of volumetric concentration of
wheel surface. Where, grain in the wheel, the volume percentage V g of grain in Δ3 is
!
ds Is the wheel diameter 4 d mean 3 1
vs Is the wheel speed Vg ¼ π 8 =Δ3 ð3Þ
3 2 8
ae Is the grinding depth
h Is the protrusion height of a grain Thereby the average number of the grains on the wheel
h max Is the maximum grain protrusion height surface per unit area, N s , can be obtained from
h cu, max Is the maximum grain indention depth 2 ! 23
h min Is the minimum protrusion height, below which 1 6V g
Ns ¼ ¼ ð4Þ
a grain will not contact with the workpiece, and Δ πd 3mean
it can be calculated from h min =h max −h cu, max Furthermore, the number of the grains passing through the
h cutx Is the indention depth of a grain, given by grinding zone per unit time is given by
h cutx =h −h min.
N total ¼ vs b N s ð5Þ
It should be noted that the relative dimensions between the where v s is the wheel speed and b is the grinding width.
grain sizes and the wheel diameter are exaggerated compared
with the actual relative dimensions in Fig. 1. The reason for
the exaggeration is to legibly express the grain protrusion 3 Calculation of critical grain indention depth
height and the grain indention depth.
Wheel surface topography measurements in Ref. [13] show 3.1 The critical indention depth for plowing
that d max and d mean are very close to the maximum grain
protrusion height h max and the mean grain protrusion height The workpiece surface will deform elastically if a grain slides
h mean, respectively. The grain protrusion height is found in on the workpiece surface. The contact between the sliding
normal distribution with mean value h mean and standard grain and the workpiece can be likened to that between a
deviation σ, given by σ =(h max −h mean)/3, so the probability sphere and a surface. Equation (6) was deviated from Hertzian
density function of grain protrusion height can be written as contact theory with an assumption that the grain was rigid in
Ref. [14],
3 1 3ðx−hmean Þ 2
P ð xÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi exp − ð2Þ 2
ðhmax −hmean Þ 2π 2 hmax −hmean 3π p 2 d gx
δ ¼ hcutx ¼ ð6Þ
4 E 2
2.3 The average number of grains per unit area where E * is the equivalent elastic modulus, given by 1/E * =
(1−υ 12 )/E 1 +(1−υ 22 )/E 2,
The spatial distribution of the grains within the wheel is
assumed to be uniform, and the interval between two adjacent E Is Young’s modulus
υ Poisson’s ratio
subscripts 1 and 2 represent the grain and workpiece,
respectively
δ Is the interference between the two profiles, i.e., the
indention depth of the grain (the grain is rigid)
p Is the mean contact pressure.
The critical indention depth for plowing h plow, min and the
Fig. 1 Description of grain protrusion height grain diameter d gx are linked with each other via a defined
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 70:2111–2123 2115
coefficient ξ plow. An expression for h plow, min can be obtained 3.3 Calculation of the maximum grain indention depth
by substituting Eq. (7) into Eq. (6)
To divide the grinding zone described in Section 4 and to
2 2 model the grinding force described in Section 5, it is necessary
1 3π H
hplow;min ¼ ξplow d gx ¼ d gx ð8Þ to calculate the maximum grain indention depth h cu, max. With
2 4 2E the purpose of calculating h cu, max, the volume of chips
removed by all the cutting grains per unit time V cut is made
equal to the grinding removal rate V. The derivation of h cu, max
is described as below.
3.2 The critical indention depth for cutting Firstly, V cut can be calculated analytically by integrating
the volume of the chips removed by all the individual cutting
Results of single grain diamond cutting tests in Ref. [15] show grains. For this purpose, the relationship between the
that there appears to be a minimum indention depth of a grain geometrical parameters of the chip and the cutting grains has
below which cutting may not occur. This critical indention to be developed. The chip cross-section A(x) is indicated by
depth was reported to be 0.025d gx . A coefficient ξ cut is the shadow areas, as shown in Fig. 2, can be determined as
defined in the same way as ξ plow. Then the critical indention
depth for cutting h cu,min is given by 1 2
AðxÞ ¼ d ð2θ−sin2θÞ ð10Þ
8 gx
hcu;min ¼ ξcut d gx ¼ 0:025d gx ð9Þ
"Z #
hmin þξcut d max Z Z Z
hcutx
ξcut −d mean hmax xmax
V cut ¼ N total l c AðxÞPðhÞ f ðxÞdxdh þ AðxÞPðhÞf ðxÞdxdh ð11Þ
hcut;min xmin hmin þξcut d max xmin
where l c is the grinding zone length, given by Is the real contact length of a grain contact with
l c =(a e d s )1/2. the workpiece
Secondly, the grinding removal rate is defined as l Is a defined variable to represent an arbitrary
location of the grinding zone
V ¼ ae b v w ð12Þ h cutl Is the indention depth of a grain at position l
h cutl, max Is the maximum grain indention depth at
position l
where v w is the workpiece speed.
h cut, max Is the maximum indention depth of a grain during
Finally, the maximum grain indention depth hcu, max can be
its passing through the grinding zone.
determined by making Eq. (11) equal to Eq. (12).
are sliding, plowing and cutting, and h cutl , max Ax ¼ πr2ox ¼ πhcutx d gx −hcutx ð18Þ
belongs to the range between ξ cutd min and h cu, max.
The real contact area between the contacting grains and the
4.2 Grain contact radius and real contact area ratio workpiece at position l, A l , can be expressed as
Z hmax Z xmax
The contact radius r ox between a contacting grain and the Al ¼ N Δ f ðxÞPðhÞAx dxdh ð19Þ
workpiece, as shown in Fig. 2, can be obtained as h0 xmin
Fig. 3 Four stages of a grain during its passing through the grinding zone Fig. 5 Force analyses of a sliding grain and a plowing grain
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 70:2111–2123 2117
Al Al
Aratiol ¼ ¼ ð20Þ
AΔ Δl b
The normal and tangential force per plowing grain was 5.2 Establishment of grinding force model
modeled in Ref. [12] based on the similarity between the grain
indention and Brinell hardness test, shown in Fig. 5. The Firstly, the grinding zone is evenly divided into n equal
normal and tangential force per plowing grain can be segments. The grinding force at position l is represented
expressed as by the grinding force per segment at position l . The
contact types between the grains and the workpiece are
determined according to h cutl and d gx . Secondly, the
F pn;x ¼ F brinell ðcosα−μsinαÞ grinding force F i with normal component F ni and
ð22Þ
F pt;x ¼ F brinell ðsinα þ μcosαÞ tangential component F ti at position l is derived as
below, where i ∈[1, n ].
If h cutl belongs to the range between zero and ξ plowd min,
the contact type is sliding. Then the grinding force at position l
where F brinell is Brinell indention force; α is the effective can be expressed as
attack angle, given by α =arcos(1−2h cutx /d gx ).
8 Z
In the grinding force model of a cutting grain proposed in h0 þξplow d min Z xmax
>
>
Ref. [16], it was considered that there existed a minimum >
< ti
F ¼ N Δ f ðxÞPðhÞF rt;x dxdh
undeformed chip thickness, above which the workpiece A¼ Z h0 þξplow d min Z xmax
h0 xmin
ð24Þ
>
>
material was turned into chips, below which the workpiece >
: F ni ¼ N Δ f ðxÞPðhÞF rn;x dxdh
material underwent plastic deformation. In this study, it is h0 xmin
considered that all the workpiece material will be turned into
chips above the indention depth of a cutting grain, as shown in If h cutl belongs to the range between ξ plowd min and
Fig. 6. ξ plow d max , the contact type is sliding when d gx is
The cutting force model of a single grain can be expressed greater than h cutl /ξ plow and smaller than d max ; the
as contact type is plowing when d gx is greater than d min
2118 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 70:2111–2123
8 2 3
> Z h0 þξplow d max Z xmax Z h0 þξplow d max Z
hcutl
> ξplow −d mean
>
> F ti ¼ N Δ 4 f ðxÞPðhÞF rt;x dxdh þ f ðxÞPðhÞ F pt;x dxdh5
>
>
< h0 þξplow d min
hcutl
ξplow −d mean h0 þξplow d min xmin
B¼ 2 3 ð25Þ
>
> Z h0 þξplow d max Z xmax Z h0 þξplow d max Z
hcutl
ξplow −d mean
>
> 4
>
> F ¼ NΔ f ðxÞPðhÞ F rn;x dxdh þ f ðxÞPðhÞ F pn;x dxdh5
: ni h0 þξplow d min
hcutl
ξplow −d mean h0 þξplow d min xmin
If h cutl belongs to the range between ξ plowd max and If h cut / belongs to the range between ξ cut d min and
ξ cutd min, the contact type is plowing. Then the grinding force ξ cutd max, the contact type is plowing when d gx is greater
at position l can be expressed as than h cutl /ξ cut and smaller than d max; the contact type is
cutting when d gx is greater than d min and smaller than
8 Z h0 þξcut d min Z
>
xmax h cutl /ξ cut. Then the grinding force at position l can be
>
> F ¼ N f ðxÞPðhÞ F pt;x dxdh
< ti Δ expressed as
h0 þξplow d max xmin
C¼ Z h0 þξcut d min Z ð26Þ
>
>
xmax
>
: ni
F ¼ N Δ f ðxÞPðhÞF pn;x dxdh
h0 þξplow d max xmin
8 "Z #
h0 þξcut d max Z xmax Z h0 þξcut d max Z
hcutl
> ξcut −d mean
>
>
< F ti ¼ N Δ
>
h0 þξcut d min
hcutl
f ðxÞPðhÞF pt;x dxdh þ f ðxÞPðhÞ F ct;x dxdh
ξcut −d mean h0 þξcut d min xmin
D¼ "Z # ð27Þ
> h0 þξcut d max Z xmax Z h0 þξcut d max Z
hcutl
> ξcut −d mean
>
>
: F ni ¼ N Δ hcutl
f ðxÞPðhÞF pn;x dxdh þ f ðxÞPðhÞ F cn;x dxdh
h0 þξcut d min ξcut −d mean h0 þξcut d min xmin
If h cutl belongs to the range between ξ cutd max and h cu, max, expressed as F i =(A +B +C +D +E ), when h cutl , max
the contact type is cutting. Then the grinding force at position belongs to the range between ξ cutd max and h cu, max.
l can be expressed as
Finally, the total grinding force can be obtained by
8 Z hmax Z xmax
>
>
>
< tiF ¼ N Δ f ðxÞPðhÞF ct;x dxdh
h0 þξcut d max xmin Xn
E¼ Z hmax Z xmax ð28Þ F ¼ df Fi ð29Þ
>
>
>
: niF ¼ N Δ f ð x ÞP ð h ÞF cn;x dxdh 1
h0 þξcut d max xmin
heat flux generated at position l, q l can be approximated as will remain in the workpiece and some is removed by
convection to the fluid. This can be expressed as
ql ¼ ð F ti vs Þ=ðbΔl Þ ð30Þ
qwl ¼ qwbl þ qfl ð35Þ
After calculating q l , the heat flux profile across the
grinding contact length can be established. Further analysis where q wbl is the heat flux that remains in the workpiece at
need to be performed to model the workpiece energy partition, position l, and q fl is the heat flux transferred into the fluid by
which is the fraction of total grinding energy going to heat the convection at position l.
workpiece. With regard to the energy partition at position l, it The heat flux removed from the workpiece by the fluid at
need to be analyzed according to h cutl, max. In the Areas I and position l is
II of the divided grinding zone where h cutl, max is less than
qfl ¼ hfl ðT 0l þ T ∞ −T initial Þ ð36Þ
ξ cut ×d min and no cutting occurs, the generated heat will be
instantaneously conducted into the workpiece and grains. In
the Area III of the divided grinding zone where h cutl, max is where T 0l is the temperature rise of the workpiece at position
larger than ξ cut ×d min and cutting occurs, the generated heat l,
will be instantaneously conducted into the workpiece, grains T∞ Is ambient temperature
and chips. Thus T initial Is the initial temperature of the fluid
ql ¼ qgl þ qwl þ qchl ð31Þ h fl Is the convection heat transfer coefficient of the fluid
at position l.
where q gl , q wl , and q chl is heat flux conducted into the grains,
workiece and chips, respectively. In the Area I and II, q chl =0. The energy partitions at position l to the workpiece
In the Area III, the heat conducted into the chips is assumed to background, grains, chips, and fluid are respectively as:
be proportional to h cutl, max, and the heat flux conducted into ε wbl =q wbl /q l , ε gl =q gl /q l , ε chl =q chl /q l , and ε fl =q fl /q l . It is
the chips can be express as noted that the convection heat transfer coefficient of the fluid
varies in the grinding zone and is difficult to determine, which
2ech ae vw hcu;max lhcu;max −l c ξcut d min needs to be thoroughly studied in the future.
qchl ¼
2 ð32Þ
l c hcu;max −ξcut d min
7 Experimental set up
where e ch is the limiting chip energy and this value is
approximately 6.21 J/mm3 for ferrous materials [18].
Surface grinding experiments were conducted on MKL7120×
In Ref. [19], the energy partition to the workpiece between
6 CNC surface grinder using a vitrified white alumina wheel
the wheel and the workpiece was modeled and expressed as
(WA60L6V). The wheel was dressed before every grinding
" #−1 pass. The workpiece was hardened GCr15 bearing steel (HRC
0:97k g
Rwg ¼ 1 þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð33Þ 62) with 60 mm length in grinding direction and 10 mm in
ro vs ðkρcÞw width. The grinding experiments were performed in the up
mode with parameters shown in Table 1. The properties of
where k is thermal conductivity, ρ is density, c is specific heat, hardened GCr15 bearing steel and white alumina were listed
subscripts g and w represent the grain and workpiece, in Table 2. During grinding, the grinding forces were
respectively, r o is the mean contact radius between the measured using a piezoelectric transducer based dynamometer
contacting grains and the workpiece. (YDXM-III97) located under the workpiece clamping device,
Based on Eq. (33) with a varying r ol , the energy partition to which is connected to a charge amplifier (type JY5002).
the workpiece between the grains and the workpiece at Grinding force signals were sampled at 1,000 Hz using NI-
position l can be determined as PXI-1042Q-National Instruments and Labview software.
" #−1
0:97k g
qwl ¼ ðql −qchl Þ 1 þ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð34Þ 8 Results and analysis
rol vs ðkρcÞw
8.1 Validation of grinding force model
The energy partition analysis aforementioned is enough for
dry grinding. However, further analysis need to be performed Two constants that are not determined independently in the
to find out the amount of heat removed from the workpiece by model are the friction factor μ and the empirical constant d f .
convection to fluid in wet grinding. Some of the heat flux q wl , The friction factor was obtained as μ =0.25 via the model
2120 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 70:2111–2123
Fig. 8 Contributions of each component with workpiece speed for v s = Fig. 10 Contributions of each component with wheel speed for v w =
20 m/s, a e =0.04 mm 2,000 mm/min, a e =0.04 mm
ratio on the energy partition to the workpiece is not included in to perfect the energy partition model considering cooling
the energy partition model. Further analysis needs to be done via convection of grinding fluid and real contact area
to perfect the energy partition model in the future. ratio.
5. Combining the grinding force model with the energy
8.4 Coupled analysis of grinding force, grinding heat, partition model, the profile of heat flux in grinding zone
and material properties can be obtained.
Grinding force, grinding heat, and material properties affect each Acknowledgments The work is supported by the National Basic
Research Program of China (973 Program, grant no. 2011CB706600).
other in a grinding process. For some metals having work
hardening effect, grinding force increases gradually during the
initial stage of grinding. Then grinding heat generation also
increases as the increasing grinding force, which will induce References
high temperature in the grinding contact zone. The high
temperature can soften the workpiece material, which will in
1. Malkin S, Guo C (2007) Thermal analysis of grinding. CIRP Ann-
turn affect grinding force and grinding heat. Therefore, modeling Manuf Techn 56(2):760–782
of grinding process needs a continuous loop feedback process. 2. Qin M, Ye B, Jia X, He A (2013) Experimental investigation of
An assumption that material properties will not change in residual stress distribution in pre-stress cutting. Int J Adv Manuf Tech
65(1–4):355–361
the grinding process was made in the modeling of grinding
3. Umbrello D, Jawahir IS (2009) Numerical modeling of the influence
force. The assumption can be an initial condition of the of process parameters and workpiece hardness on white layer
continuous loop feedback modeling process. With the grinding formation in AISI 52100 steel. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 44(9–10):
force model and the energy partition model aforementioned, the 955–968
4. Marinescu ID, Hitchiner M, Uhlmann E, Rowe WB, Inasaki I (2007)
profile of the heat flux into the workpiece can be obtained.
Handbook of machining with grinding wheels. CRC Press, Boca
Then, the grinding temperature in the grinding contact zone can Raton
be obtained. Meanwhile, a material model linking grinding 5. Niu W, Xu Y (2003) Experimental study on grinding force of
temperature and grinding force is required to establish the engineering ceramics in creep feed grinding. Diamond Abrasives
Eng 2:24–27
feedback process. In [21], the Johnson–Cook model was
6. Liu Q, Chen X, Wang Y, Gindy N (2008) Empirical modelling of
adopted. In short, grinding is the process under the coupling grinding force based on multivariate analysis. J Mater Process Tech
of force, heat, and material properties. 203(1–3):420–430
7. Werner G (1978) Influence of work material on grinding forces.
CIRP Ann-Manuf Techn 27(1):243–248
8. Malkin S, Guo C (2008) Grinding technology: theory and
9 Conclusions applications of machining with abrasives, 2nd edn. Industrial Press,
New York
1. A new grinding force model based on the analyses of 9. Li L, Fu J, Peklenik J (1980) A study of grinding force mathematical
grain trajectory and grain workpiece contact was model. CIRP Ann-Manuf Techn 29(1):245–249
10. Patnaik Durgumahanti US, Singh V, Venkateswara Rao P (2010) A
established. Comparisons between experimental new model for grinding force prediction and analysis. Int J Mach
measurements and theoretical results show that the model Tool Manu 50(3):231–240
can predict grinding force accurately. 11. Badger JA, Torrance AA (2000) A comparison of two models to
2. This model can be used to analyze the contributions of predict grinding forces from wheel surface topography. Int J Mach
Tool Manu 40(8):1099–1120
sliding, plowing and cutting to total grinding forces. 12. Hecker RL, Liang SY, Wu XJ, Xia P, Jin DGW (2007) Grinding force
Further analysis shows that higher heat generation in and power modeling based on chip thickness analysis. Int J Adv
grinding process compared with other metal removed Manuf Tech 33(5–6):449–459
processes is primarily attributed to plowing. 13. Zhou X, Xi F (2002) Modeling and predicting surface
roughness of the grinding process. Int J Mach Tool Manu
3. Grain trajectory analysis can be performed to calculate 42(8):969–977
grain contact radius and real contact area ratio, which are 14. Xie Y, Williams JA (1996) The prediction of friction and wear
two varying parameters affecting energy partition in when a soft surface slides against a harder rough surface. Wear
grinding zone. 196(1–2):21–34
15. Younis M, Alawi H (1984) Probabilistic analysis of the surface
4. An energy partition model taking grain contact radius into grinding process. Trans CSME 8(4):208–213
consideration was established from microscopic aspects. 16. Park HW, Liang SY (2008) Force modeling of micro-grinding
Analysis shows that it is reasonable to neglect the heat incorporating crystallographic effects. Int J Mach Tool Manu
conducted into chips to model energy partition to the 48(15):1658–1667
17. Park HW, Liang SY, Chen R (2007) Microgrinding force
workpiece for the given grinding conditions. Energy predictive modelling based on microscale single grain
partition to the workpiece varies in a similar way as grain interaction analysis. Int J Manuf Technol Manage 12(1–3):
contact radius in grinding zone. Further studies are needed 25–38
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2014) 70:2111–2123 2123
18. Hadad M, Sadeghi B (2012) Thermal analysis of minimum 20. Ju Y (1997) Thermal aspects of grinding for surface integrity.
quantity lubrication-MQL grinding process. Int J Mach Tool Dissertation, Purdue University
Manu 63:1–15 21. Park HW, Liang SY (2009) Force modeling of microscale grinding
19. Rowe WB (2001) Thermal analysis of high efficiency deep grinding. process incorporating thermal effects. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 44(5–6):
Int J Mach Tool Manu 41(1):1–19 476–486