0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Fluidized Bed Assisted Abrasive Jet Machining (FB-AJM): Precision Internal Finishing of Inconel 718 Components

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Barletta1

Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica, Università degli Studi di Roma “Tor Vergata”, Via del Politecnico, 1–00133 Rome, Italybarletta@mail.mec.uniroma2.it

D. Ceccarelli, S. Guarino, V. Tagliaferri

Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica, Università degli Studi di Roma “Tor Vergata”, Via del Politecnico, 1–00133 Rome, Italy

1

Corresponding author.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 129(6), 1045-1059 (Mar 13, 2007) (15 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2752831 History: Received December 16, 2006; Revised March 13, 2007

The relatively new technique of fluidized bed assisted abrasive jet machining (FB-AJM) is applied to finishing the inner surfaces of tubular Inconel 718 components. The effects of abrasive size, jet pressure, and machining cycle were evaluated, and the behavior of abrasive cutting edges acting against the surface during the process to remove material is accounted for. The finished surface was found to be highly dependent on jet pressure because it affects the abrasive contact against the surface as well as the finishing force acting on the abrasive, on the abrasive grain size, which controls the depth of cut, and on machining cycle, which controls the interaction time between the abrasives and the surface being finished. By altering these conditions, this process achieves surface roughness (Ra) as fine as 0.1μm and imparts minimal additional residual stress on the surface. This study also reveals the mechanisms that determine the smoothing of the inner surface of Inconel 718 tubes and improve the form accuracy, i.e., the internal roundness of the Inconel 718 tube.

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

The fluidized bed assisted abrasive jet machining (FB-AJM) system

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Reversibility of machining system in FB-AJM

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Evaluation of macroscopic 3D surface morphology

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

MEP of raw response data for factors average roughness and material removal

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Trend of roughness parameters according to abrasive mesh size in standard machining conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

SEM images in standard machining conditions using the finest abrasive grains (mesh size 400) at different magnification: (a) 1000x, (b) 2000x, (c) 5000x, (d) 10000x, (e) 20000x, (f) 50000x, and (g) 100000x

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

SEM images of starting surface of Inconel 718 tubular workpiece

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Circumferential uniformity of surface finishing after FB-AJM according to abrasive mesh size

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

3D maps of inner surfaces of Inconel 718 tubular workpieces after form suppression: (a) untreated, (b) 24 mesh size, (c) 46 mesh size, (d) 80 mesh size, (e) 180 mesh size, (f) 280 mesh size, and (g) 400 mesh size

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Tubular workpiece cilindricity before and after FB-AJM machining according to abrasive mesh size

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

FFT analysis of 3D maps of the inner surfaces of Inconel 718 tubular workpieces after form suppression and zoom on first 20Hz: (a) untreated, (b) 24 mesh size, (c) 46 mesh size, (d) 80 mesh size, (e) 180 mesh size, (f) 280 mesh size, and (g) 400 mesh size

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Residual stresses of tubular workpieces before and after FB-AJM machining according to abrasive mesh size

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

3D maps of machined surface: (a1) untreated; (a2) treated at 24 mesh size, 2 machining cycles and 2bar; (a3) untreated with form suppression; (a4) treated at 24 mesh size, 2 machining cycles and 2 bar with form suppression; (b1) untreated; (b2) treated at 24 mesh size, 4 machining cycles and 4bar; (b3) untreated with form suppression; (b4) treated at 24 mesh size, 4 machining cycles and 4bar with form suppression; (c1) untreated; (c2) treated at 24 mesh size, 8 machining cycles and 8bar; (c3) untreated with form suppression; (c4) treated at 24 mesh size, 8 machining cycles and 8bar with form suppression

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Roughness profiles in standard machining conditions according to abrasive mesh size: (a) untreated, (b) 24 mesh size, (c) 46 mesh size, (d) 80 mesh size, (e) 180 mesh size, (f) 280 mesh size, (g) 400 mesh size, and (h) spot on (b) from 3.5 to 4.5mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

SEM images in standard machining conditions according to abrasive mesh size: (a) untreated, (b) 24 mesh size, (c) 46 mesh size, (d) 80 mesh size, (e) 180 mesh size, (f) 280 mesh size, and (g) 400 mesh size

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