4.7 Article

Maximum undeformed equivalent chip thickness for ductile-brittle transition of zirconia ceramics under different lubrication conditions

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2017.06.003

关键词

Maximum undeformed equivalent chip thickness; Lubrication conditions; Debris formation mechanism; Zirconia ceramics; Ductile-brittle transition; Grinding forces

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51575290, 51175276]
  2. Qingdao Science and Technology Program of Basic Research Projects [14-2-4-18-jch]
  3. Huangdao District Application Science and Technology Project [2014-1-55]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the critical maximum undeformed equivalent chip thickness for ductile-brittle transition (DBh(max-e)) of zirconia ceramics under different lubrication conditions. A DBh(max-e) model is developed through geometry and kinematics analyses of ductile-mode grinding. Result shows that DBh(max-e) decreases with increasing friction coefficient (mu). An experimental investigation is then conducted to validate the model and determine the effect of dry lubrication, minimum quantity lubrication (MQL), and nanoparticle jet minimum quantity lubrication (NJMQL) conditions on DBh(max-e). According to different formation mechanisms of debris, the grinding behavior of zirconia ceramics is categorized into elastic sliding friction, plastic removal, powder removal, and brittle removal. Grinding forces per unit undeformed chip thickness (Fn/h and Ft/h) are obtained. The lubrication condition affects the normal force and ultimately influences the resultant force on workpiece. In comparison with dry grinding (DBh(max-e) = 0.8 mu m), MQL and NJMQL grinding processes increase DBh(max-e) by 0.99 and 1.79 mu m respectively; this finding is similar to model result. The theoretical model is then assessed by different volume fractions of nanofluids under NJMQL condition with an average percentage error of less than 8.6%.

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