0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Finite Element Modeling of Hard Roller Burnishing: An Analysis on the Effects of Process Parameters Upon Surface Finish and Residual Stresses

[+] Author and Article Information
Partchapol Sartkulvanich

Engineering Research Center for Net Shape Manufacturing, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210

Francisco Jasso, Ciro Rodriguez

Center for Innovation in Design and Technology, Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Monterrey, N.L., Mexico

Taylan Altan

Engineering Research Center for Net Shape Manufacturing, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210Altan.1@osu.edu

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 129(4), 705-716 (Feb 16, 2007) (12 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2738121 History: Received July 19, 2006; Revised February 16, 2007

Hard roller burnishing is a cost-effective finishing and surface enhancement process where a ceramic ball rolls on the machined surface to flatten the roughness peaks. The ball is supported and lubricated by hydrostatic fluid in a special tool holder. The process not only improves surface finish but also imposes favorable compressive residual stresses in functional surfaces, which can lead to long fatigue life. Most research in the past focused on experimental studies. There is still a special need for a reliable finite element method (FEM) model that provides a fundamental understanding of the process mechanics. In this study, two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional FEM models for hard roller burnishing were established. The developed 2D FEM model was used to study the effects of process parameters (i.e., burnishing pressure, feed rate) on surface finish and residual stresses. The simulation results were evaluated and compared to the experimental data. Results show that the established FEM model could predict the residual stresses and provided useful information for the effect of process parameters. Both FEM and experiments show that burnishing pressure is the most influence, where high burnishing pressure produces less roughness and more compressive residual stress at the surface.

Copyright © 2007 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Roller burnishing process (2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Simulation sequence for 2-D FEM modeling of roller burnishing (2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

(a) Comparison of the load-depth curve between FEM simulation and indentation tests of the hard-turned AISI 52100 (60 HRC) and (b) comparison of the flow stress obtained from inverse analysis and compression tests (2,24)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

(a) FEM simulation of indentation test, (b) comparison of load-depth curves between FEM simulation and experiment for indentation of AA 6061-T6, and (c) a flowchart of FEM inverse analysis to determine the flow stress of the surface material

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

(a) Roller burnishing process and (b) schematics of burnishing motion on the plane W(1)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Simulation sequence for 2D FEM modeling of roller burnishing

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Setups of the 2D roller burnishing simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Meshes of the ball tool and the workpiece in the 3D roller burnishing simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Burnishing force versus depth curve, obtained from 3D roller burnishing simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Effect of friction factor on normal and rolling forces (in z and y directions)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Surface nodes of initial hard turned and burnished surfaces obtained from a 2D simulation (a burnishing condition uses Pb=40MPa and fb=0.05mm∕rev)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Surface nodal points for extraction of residual stress data from 2D simulation (Pb=40MPa and fb=0.05mm∕rev)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Tangential and axial residual stress distributions of the hard turned and the burnished surfaces (from simulation and experiment), for Pb=40MPa and fb=0.05mm∕rev

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Effects of burnishing feed rate (for the same burnishing pressure of 40MPa) on mean roughness and roughness depth

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Effects of burnishing feed rate (for the same burnishing pressure of 40MPa) on tangential and axial residual stress distributions along the depth (distance from surface)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Effects of burnishing pressure (for the same burnishing feed rate of 0.05mm∕rev) on mean roughness and roughness depth

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Effects of burnishing pressure (for the same burnishing feed rate of 0.05mm∕rev) on tangential and axial residual stress distributions along the depth (distance from surface)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Residual stress of hard turned surface, assigned in the workpiece mesh model of 2D roller burnishing simulation: (a) tangential residual stress and (b) axial residual stress

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Effects of initial residual stresses from hard turning in the predicted residual stresses in 2D roller burnishing simulation, for Pb=32MPa, fb=0.05mm∕rev

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 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