0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Online Identification of Shearing and Plowing Constants in End Milling

[+] Author and Article Information
J.-J. Junz Wang, C. M. Zheng

Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan 701

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 125(1), 57-64 (Mar 04, 2003) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1536931 History: Received October 01, 2001; Revised June 01, 2002; Online March 04, 2003
Copyright © 2003 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Koenigsberger,  F., and Sabberwal,  A. J. P., 1961, “An Investigation into the Cutting Force Pulsations During Milling Operations,” Int. J. Mach. Tool Des. Res., 1, pp. 15–33.
Tlusty,  J., and MacNeil,  P., 1975, “Dynamics of Cutting Force in End Milling,” CIRP Ann., 24, pp. 21–25.
Kline,  W. A., DeVor,  R. E., and Lindberg,  J. R., 1982, “The Prediction of Cutting Forces in End Milling with Application to Cornering Cuts,” Int. J. Mach. Tool Des. Res., 22, pp. 7–22.
Fu,  H. J., DeVor,  R. E., and Kapoor,  S. G., 1984, “A Mechanistic Model for the Prediction of the Force System in Face Milling Operations,” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 106, pp. 81–88.
Fussel,  B. K., and Srinivasan,  K., 1989, “An Investigation of the End Milling Process Under Varying Machining Conditions,” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 111, pp. 27–36.
Wang,  J.-J. J., Liang,  S. Y., and Book,  W. J., 1994, “Convolution Analysis of Milling Force Pulsation,” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 116, pp. 17–25.
Lazoglu,  I., and Liang,  S. Y., 1997, “Analytical Modeling of Ball-End Milling Force,” Int. J. of Machining Science and Technology, 1(2), pp. 219–234.
Jayaram,  S., Kapoor,  S. G., and DeVor,  R. E., 2001, “Estimation of the Specific Cutting Pressures for Mechanistic Cutting Force Models,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 41, pp. 265–281.
Yellowley,  I., 1985, “Observations on the Mean Values of Forces, Torque and Specific Power in the Peripheral Milling Process,” Int. J. Mach. Tool Des. Res., 25, pp. 337–346.
Armarego,  E. J. A., and Whitfield,  R. C., 1985, “Computer Based Modeling of Popular Machining Operations for Forces and Power Prediction,” CIRP Ann., 34, pp. 65–69.
Budak,  E., Altintas,  Y., and Armarego,  E. J. A., 1998, “Prediction of Milling Force Coefficients From Orthogonal Cutting Data,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 118, pp. 216–224.
Wang,  J.-J. J., and Zheng,  C. M., 2002, “An Analytical Force Model with Shearing and Ploughing Mechanisms for End Milling,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 42, pp. 761–771.
Endres,  W. J., DeVor,  R. E., and Kapoor,  S. G., 1995, “A Dual-Mechanism Approach to the Prediction of Machining Forces, Part 1: Model Development” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 117, pp. 526–533.
Yucesan,  G., and Altintas,  Y., 1996, “Prediction of Ball End Milling Forces,” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 118, pp. 95–103.
Melkote,  S. N., and Endres,  W. J., 1998, “The Importance of Including Size Effect When Modeling Slot Milling,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 120, pp. 69–75.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Cutting geometry and coordinate systems in end milling
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of simulated cutting forces. Solid line: numerical simulation with cutting constants from 10. *: from identified cutting constants with two harmonic terms; ○: with five terms; and +: with seven terms. Same cutting conditions as in Table 1 with rake angle=12 deg.
Grahic Jump Location
The identified cutting constants versus average uncut chip thickness, (a) the tangential shearing constants and the lumped tangential constants, (b) the radial shearing constants and the lumped radial constants, (c) the tangential plowing constants and (d) the radial plowing constants. ○: from the first method; +: from the second method; *: lumped cutting constants for down cut; •: lumped cutting constants for up cut.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of measured and predicted forces, (a): in angle domain and (b): in frequency domain. Solid line: measured. ○: predicted. Cutting conditions: down cut, tx=0.075 mm,da=3 mm,dr=3 mm.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of measured and predicted forces, (a) in angle domain and (b) in frequency domain. Solid line: measured. ○: predicted. Cutting conditions: slot cut, tx=0.1 mm,da=5 mm,dr=10 mm.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of measured and predicted forces, (a) in angle domain and (b) in frequency domain. Solid line: measured. ○: predicted. Cutting conditions: down cut, tx=0.03 mm,da=3 mm,dr=3 mm.

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