0
Research Papers

Analysis of the Sawing Process With Abrasive Circular Saw Blades

[+] Author and Article Information
Masahiro Mizuno, Toshirou Iyama

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Iwate University, 4-3-5 Ueda, Morioka, Iwate 020-8551, Japan

Bi Zhang

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Connecticut, U-139, 191 Auditorium Road, Storrs, CT 06269-3139

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 130(1), 011012 (Feb 15, 2008) (15 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2783220 History: Received August 20, 2006; Revised July 13, 2007; Published February 15, 2008

This study simulates the sawing process with an abrasive circular saw blade and analyzes the generation of cutoff surfaces in the sawing process with the consideration of the blade deflection caused by the asymmetric wear of the blade outer edge. The analysis is built on the previous work of Matsui (1956, J. Jpn. Soc. Precis. Eng., 22, pp. 477–481) who presented an analytical formula for cutting force acting on a conical cutting edge. In this paper, the Matsui formula is modified to take into account the “size effect” of grinding and used to calculate the grinding force acting on the blade surface. A differential equation is constructed, and the related numerical solutions are provided to describe the blade deflection behavior in the sawing process. The study then discusses the influences of the “size effect,” workpiece length, workpiece speed and feed rate, as well as cutting edge density on sawing accuracies. Also discussed are workpiece speed and cutting edge density on the maximum deviation of the cutoff surface.

Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Cross-sectional profile of blade outer edge given in the analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

SC−Cp functions (function A, B,…,F)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Change of cutting surface geometries in the sawing process under the standard analysis conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Blade-workpiece relative locations ①–⑩

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Relationship between the mesh number per unit area and SDEV+

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Changes of Fpz and Fsz under different SC−Cp functions: (a)Fpz, and (b)Fsz

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Cutting surface geometries at blade-workpiece relative location ⑤ in Fig. 1 under different SC−Cp functions: (a) function A and (b) function E

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Changes of the maximum absolute values ∣fsz,max+∣ and ∣fsz,max−∣ of fsz on both sides of the blade under different SC−Cp functions: (a) function A, (b) function C and (c) function E

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Effects of workpiece length WL on SDEV+ and SDEV− under different SC−Cp functions: (a)WL vs SDEV+, and (b)WL vs SDEV−

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Effects of SC−Cp function on SDEV+ and SDEV− under different workpiece lengths WL: (a)SC−Cp function vs SDEV+ and (b)SC−Cp function vs SDEV−

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Effects of workpiece length WL on average kerf width CW under different SC−Cp functions: (a)WL vs CW and (b)SC−Cp function vs SDEV+

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Effects of speed ratio v∕V on SDEV+ and SDEV−

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Effects of cutting edge density ζ on SDEV+ and SDEV−

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Cross-sectional profile image of blade outer edge used in the experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 24

Effects of V on SDEV,UP+ and SDEV,UP− under v∕V=0.2×10−4. The error bars show the standard deviation for six experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 25

Deviations of the upper edges of the cutoff surfaces generated in the standard experimental cutoff conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 26

Effects of v on SDEV,UP+ and SDEV,UP− under V=2000m∕min. The error bars show the standard deviation for six experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 27

Scratch marks on the cutoff surfaces: (a) microscope image and (b) numerically calculated patterns using function E

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 28

Schematic of plowing with a conical tool

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Grinding zones A, B, and C

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic of material removal by blade outer edge: (a) front view of the blade while sawing, and (b) removal area dSPQ by a small element PQ on the cross section O-Θ of blade outer edge during dt

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Experimental setup for confirming the validity of Eqs. 8,9,10: (a) front view of a tapered blade while grinding, and (b) right side view of (a)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Relationships between Fpz and η3 calculated with (a)ε=0 and (b)ε=0.51

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Changes of grinding force components under the standard analysis conditions: (a)Fpx, Fpy, and Fpz; (b)Fsx, Fsy, and Fsz; and (c)Fx(=Fpx+Fsx), Fy(=Fpy+Fsy), and Fz(=Fpz+Fsz)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Relationships between (a)η1 and X1Fpx+X2Fpy, and (b)η2 and X1Fpy−X2Fpx, where the values η1, η2, X1 and X2 were calculated with ε=0.51

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Schematic of material removal by the blade side face between time t-dt and time t: (a) front view of a blade while sawing and (b) three-dimensional view of the material removal volume uEFGH removed by the blade side in the region ΛEFGH during dt

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Meshes for numerical analysis of sawing process

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Grinding force components acting on each segments

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