Research Papers

Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication Modeling of Hydrodynamic Nanopolishing Process

[+] Author and Article Information
Rinku Mittal

Department of Mechanical Engineering,  Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076, Indiarinkumittal@gmail.com

Ramesh K. Singh

Department of Mechanical Engineering,  Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076, Indiaramesh@me.iitb.ac.in

Suhas S. Joshi

Department of Mechanical Engineering,  Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076, Indiassjoshi@iitb.ac.in

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 134(4), 041001 (Jun 27, 2012) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4006769 History: Received September 23, 2010; Revised March 02, 2012; Published June 26, 2012; Online June 27, 2012

Nanopolishing processes are used in medical, industrial, telecommunication, optics, and military fields. Hydrodynamic polishing (HDP) is one of the prominent nanopolishing methods in creating nanopolished surfaces on hard and profiled surfaces, where rigid tool-based methods like diamond turning, grinding, and honing have many limitations. This work is focused on modeling of hydrodynamic polishing method. In this method, a film of abrasive suspension is formed between the work-piece surface and a rotating soft tool, which helps in nanopolishing. The past experimental research gives an insight into the process but the process has not been explicitly modeled. Consequently, besides experimental characterization, a numerical/mathematical model of hydrodynamic polishing process is important. This paper presents a model of the HDP process which takes into account the polishing process variables, such as, contact load, spindle speed, tool and work-piece material properties/geometry, and abrasive suspension properties. The response of the model is the pressure distribution and the abrasive film thickness in the polishing zone. To model the elastohydrodynamic process encountered in HDP, the pressure and the film thickness profiles of lubricated isothermal point contacts have been evaluated using the multilevel multi-integration (MLMI) scheme coded in C programming language. Finally, load, tool stiffness, speed, and particle concentration in the suspension have been implicitly correlated to the surface roughness (SR) to evolve a semi-empirical model for surface roughness as a function of mean film thickness and mean pressure. Empirical models for mean film thickness and mean pressure have also been developed as a function of process variables. These models have been developed from a Taguchi L27 orthogonal array wherein the mean pressure/film thickness values have been determined from the model and the average surface roughness values have been measured experimentally. It has been observed that the load does not affect the surface roughness significantly and mean pressure does not change with the change in abrasive size and spindle speed. Abrasive particle concentration has been found to be the most important parameter and it affects the surface roughness significantly.

Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Overall modeling approach for development of semi-empirical model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic of the HDP process [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Experimental setup for the study of HDP process [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Viscosity variation with shear rate for abrasive sizes of 0.05, 0.3, and 1 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Flow diagram of full multigrid process

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Computational domain for point contact EHL in hydrodynamic polishing

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

(a) Pressure distribution in point contact EHL and (b) film thickness in point contact EHL

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Pressure and film thickness profile in point contact EHL at centerline (y = 0)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Pressure distribution on thin film (a) case 1 and (b) case 2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Simulated and measured mean pressure values

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Sensitivity analysis for force

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Sensitivity analysis for radius

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Logic for selection of interactions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Scanning electron micrographs: (a) unpolished surface and (b) polished surface; white light interferometery images: (c) unpolished surface and (d) polished surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Main effect plots for load (a) pressure; (b) thickness; and (c) roughness

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Main effect plots for abrasive size (a) pressure; (b) thickness; and (c) roughness

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Main effect plots for stiffness (a) pressure; (b) thickness; and (c) roughness

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Main effect plots for spindle speed (a) pressure; (b) thickness; and (c) roughness

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Comparison of EHL and regression models for (a) mean film pressure and (b) mean film thickness

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Predicted and measured surface roughness values



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