4.5 Article

General Modeling and Calibration Method for Cutting Force Prediction With Flat-End Cutter

出版社

ASME
DOI: 10.1115/1.4038371

关键词

milling force; cutter runout; specific cutting force coefficients; bottom edge; peripheral milling

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council [201606280184]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51235009, 51675417]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A general calibration method of cutter runout and specific cutting force coefficients (SCFCs) for flat-end cutter is proposed in this paper, and a high accuracy of cutting force prediction during peripheral milling is established. In the paper, the cutter runout, the bottom-edge cutting effect, and the actual feedrate with limitation during large tool path curvature are concerned comprehensively. First, based on the trochoid motion, a tooth trajectory model is built up and an analytical instantaneous uncut chip thickness (IUCT) model is put forward for describing the cutter/workpiece engagement (CWE). Second, a noncontact identification method for cutter runout including offset and inclination is given, which constructs an objective function by using the cutting radius relative variation between adjacent teeth, and identifies through a numerical optimization method. Thirdly, with consideration of bottom-edge cutting effect, the paper details a three-step calibration procedure for SCFCs based on an enhanced thin-plate milling experiment. Finally, a series of milling tests are performed to verify the effectiveness of the proposed method. The results show that the approach is suitable for both constant and nonconstant pitch cutter, and the generalization has been proved. Moreover, the paper points out that the cutter runout has a strong spindle speed-dependent effect, the milling force in cutter axis direction exists a switch-direction phenomenon, and the actual feedrate will be limited by large tool path curvature. All of them should be considered for obtaining an accurate milling force prediction.

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

4.5
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