4.6 Article

Coupled interaction of dynamic responses of tool and workpiece in thin wall milling

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
卷 213, 期 9, 页码 1565-1574

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.03.018

关键词

Thin wall machining; Chatter; Coupled dynamic response; Time-frequency analysis

资金

  1. EPSRC
  2. Rolls-Royce under Dorothy Hodgkin Postgraduate Award scholarship [EP/P505917/1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chatter free thin wall machining requires knowledge of the dynamics of a machine-tool system and workpiece either for designing damping solutions or for modelling impact dynamics. Previous studies on thin wall milling mostly focussed on stability studies. However studies on the interaction between the tool and workpiece responses in thin wall machining are scarce in the literature. In this work, the coupled dynamic response of tool and workpiece is presented both for an open (thin wall straight cantilever) and for closed (thin wall ring type casing) geometry structures. Experiments were carried out for different tool overhangs and depths of cut and the machining vibration signal was analysed in time-frequency domain to study the interaction, i.e. coupling, of tool-workpiece dynamic response at various cutting tooth engagement/idle times. The findings from this study highlight the importance of tool's frequency, particularly torsional and first bending modes, in impact dynamics of thin wall milling. Moreover, the differences in dynamic response interaction between a cutting tool and thin wall plate and a cylinder are identified. While the analysis of the open geometry structure showed the presence of tool and workpiece responses for any depth of cut, results on closed geometry structure exhibited a complete dominance of tool mode at higher depths of cut. These findings are of critical importance in understanding the impact dynamics in thin wall milling and also of effectiveness of passive damping solutions. (c) 2013 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.6
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