4.7 Article

Experimental characterization of material removal in dry electrical discharge drilling

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2010.02.004

关键词

Dry EDM; Material removal rate; Tool wear rate; Dimensional accuracy; Single discharge; Taguchi methods

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology, Government of India
  2. Electronica Machine Tools Limited, Pune (India)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dry electrical discharge machining is one of the novel EDM variants, which uses gas as dielectric fluid. Experimental characterization of material removal in dry electrical discharge drilling technique is presented in this paper. It is based on six-factor, three-level experiment using L-27 orthogonal array. All the experiments were performed in a 'quasi-explosion' mode by controlling pulse 'off-time' so as to maximize the material removal rate (MRR). Furthermore, an enclosure was provided around the electrodes with the aim to create a back pressure thereby restricting expansion of the plasma in the dry EDM process. The main response variables analyzed in this work were MRR, tool wear rate (TWR), oversize and compositional variation across the machined cross-sections. Statistical analysis of the results show that discharge current (I), gap voltage (V) and rotational speed (N) significantly influence MRR. TWR was found close to zero in most of the experiments. A predominant deposition of melted and eroded work material on the electrode surface instead of tool wear was evident. Compositional variation in the machined surface has been analyzed using EDAX; it showed migration of tool and shielding material into the work material. The study also analyzed erosion characteristics of a single-discharge in the dry EDM process vis-a-vis the conventional liquid dielectric EDM. It was observed that at low discharge energies, single-discharge in dry EDM could give larger MRR and crater radius as compared to that of the conventional liquid dielectric EDM. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据