0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Hydrodynamic Physical Modeling of Laser Drilling

[+] Author and Article Information
D. K. Y. Low, L. Li

Laser Processing Research Centre, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST), PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK

P. J. Byrd

Manufacturing Technology, Rolls-Royce plc, PO Box 3, Filton, Bristol BS34 7QE, UK

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 124(4), 852-862 (Oct 23, 2002) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1510518 History: Received July 01, 2001; Revised February 01, 2002; Online October 23, 2002
Copyright © 2002 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Schematic diagram of the hydrodynamic physical model with the use of an O2 assist gas
Grahic Jump Location
Schematic of effective gas flow area entering hole defined by the laser beam diameter (2rl) and the cylindrical area of radial loss flow
Grahic Jump Location
Approximation of the forced convection cooling of the melt surface by the assist gas at the hole bottom
Grahic Jump Location
Hydrodynamic physical model calculated relationship between temperature and absorbed laser intensity for drilling on EN3 low carbon steel with and without O2 assist gas
Grahic Jump Location
Model calculated relationship between drilling velocity, Vd, and its components, Vdm and Vdv, and absorbed laser intensity (a) with and (b) without the use of O2 assist gas
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between the model predicted and experimental drilling velocities for drilling on EN3 low carbon steel with and without O2 assist gas using (a) 0.5 ms and (b) 1.0 ms laser pulse width
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between the model predicted and experimental melt ejection velocities for drilling on EN3 low carbon steel with and without O2 assist gas for 0.5 ms, 1 ms and 1.5 ms pulse widths
Grahic Jump Location
Model predicted relationship between threshold time and absorbed laser intensity for drilling on EN3 low carbon steel with and without O2 assist gas
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between the model predicted threshold time and experimental points for drilling on EN3 low carbon steel (a) with and (b) without O2 assist gas
Grahic Jump Location
Typical optical micrographs showing the dependence of spatter formation on the combined pulse width (threshold time) and absorbed laser intensity parameters (a) spatter-free hole based on vaporization-dominated drilling (τ=0.3 ms and Pp=0.4 kW) and (b) spatter deposited hole due to melt-ejection dominated material removal (τ=1.0 ms and Pp=3.7 kW). Holes were drilled without assist gas.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of power density contribution from the absorbed laser intensity, Iabs, exothermic reaction, Pr, and forced convection cooling (loss), Pcooling, at increasing melt surface temperatures

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In