China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Introduction
Published in Zainul Huda, Machining Processes and Machines, 2020
Machinability refers to the ease of machining a material to obtain desired results at low cost. There are a number of quantitative measures of machinability; these measures include (a) tool life, (b) surface finish, and (c) other measures, such as cutting force, power, temperature, and chip formation. The tool life refers to the service time in minutes or seconds to a total failure of the cutting tool at certain cutting speed. The surface finish refers to the acceptable surface finish produced at standardized cutting speeds and feeds. A good machinability may mean one or more of the following: (a) minimum cutting forces, power, and temperature; (b) longer tool life (minimum tool wear); and (c) a good surface finish.
Machine-Tool Dynamometers
Published in Helmi Youssef, Hassan El-Hofy, Traditional Machining Technology, 2020
The optimization of a machining process necessitates accurate measurement of the cutting force by a special device called a machine-tool dynamometer, which is capable of measuring the components of the cutting force in a given coordinate system. It is a useful and powerful tool employed in a variety of applications in engineering research and manufacturing. A few examples of these applications are: Investigating the machinability of materialsComparing similar materials from different sourcesComparing and selecting cutting toolsDetermining optimum machining conditionsAnalyzing causes of tool failureInvestigating the most suitable cutting fluidsDetermining the conditions that yield the best surface qualityEstablishing the effect of fluctuating cutting forces on tool wear and tool life
Force-System Resultants and Equilibrium
Published in Richard C. Dorf, The Engineering Handbook, 2018
Cutting and grinding tools required in machining are usually made from hard metal (carbide) or ceramic materials; a machinability index measures the ease with which a particular material can be machined with conventional methods. The higher the machinability index, the easier it is to machine the metal or alloy. In addition to these methods, metal removal can also be achieved by ultrasonic abrasion, laser or electron beam cutting and drilling, electrical discharge or spark machining, arc milling, and chemical milling. Honing has been and will remain to be the only process that will provide both the surface roughness and crosshatched lay directions for the internal surface of engine cylinder liners in
Effectiveness of synthetic coolant at 0°C on machining of SS304 with PVD coated TiCN tool to evaluate and compare tool wear and surface finish with conventional machining method
Published in Tribology - Materials, Surfaces & Interfaces, 2023
SS304 is the most widely used austenitic stainless steel. Due to its superior mechanical properties like good corrosion resistance, heat resistance, superior strength at low temperatures and other desired mechanical properties, it has wide applications in the area of marine applications, food and medical industries [1]. Machining of SS304 possesses challenges due to high strength, hardness, fracture toughness and work-hardening characteristics. The work hardening and low thermal conductivity due to the presence of Nickel element are recognized to be responsible for the poor machinability of stainless steel and tool wear at a faster rate [2]. Machinability of a material characterizes a material with ease which can be machined easily at variable cutting speed, feed, depth of cut with higher tool life, better dimensional accuracy, good surface finish, etc.
Flat-end mill machining analysis of processed CrMnFeCoNi high-entropy alloys
Published in Materials and Manufacturing Processes, 2023
Naresh Kaushik, Anoj Meena, Harlal Singh Mali
Machinability is the ease of material removal process from the workpiece on the application of the cutting forces.[19] It is a relative parameter for checking the performance of different metals, alloys or composites at various tool materials.[20] Machinability is generally measured regarding cutting forces, moments from dynamometer data and relative cutting velocities.[21] Multiple factors affect the machinability of alloy like chemical composition, material’s crystal structure, and mechanical possessions like ductility and hardness.[22] Cutting conditions such as feed and spindle speed also play a significant role. Machinability is evaluated in terms of the rate of metal removal per cutting tool, the amplitude of machining forces, machined surface quality, heat generation during machining and energy intake through cutting.[23,24]
Review on tools and tool wear in EDM
Published in Machining Science and Technology, 2021
Deepak Sharma, Somashekhar S. Hiremath
Machinability is the ease with which a material can be machined permitting the material removal with a reasonable finish at low cost. The machinability in EDM is defined by the MRR, TWR, overcut, surface finish and surface integrity (Bhattacharyya et al., 1981). Moses and Jahan, (2015) compared the machinability of difficult to machine Ti6Al4V with soft and ductile brass using WC tool. Dimensional accuracy of the micro-features machined on Ti6Al4V had inferior quality due to the high TWR of WC and thicker re-solidified layer while micro-features on the brass had sharp edges and better surface finish. Rahul et al. (2018) studied the machinability of Ti6Al4V with tungsten and copper tool electrode. Poor thermal conductivity of the tungsten causes low MRR and high surface roughness. Recently, Marrocco et al. (2020) showed that not only the workpiece and tool material but the machinability also depends on the input pulse shapes. In general the optimal machining parameters are high MRR and low TWR. Therefore these two parameters can be used to define the cost index per unitary volume of removed material (CI), Equation 1 was used to find the economics of tool material, where Co (cost/sec) and Ct (cost/mm3) are the cost of machining operation and tool cost related to material removed by an electrode respectively (D’Urso et al., 2017).