0
Research Papers

Study of Droplet Spray Behavior of an Atomization-Based Cutting Fluid Spray System for Machining Titanium Alloys

[+] Author and Article Information
Chandra Nath

Post Doctorate Research Associate
and Visiting Lecturer
Mechanical Science and Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign,
Urbana, IL 61801
e-mail: nathc2@asme.org

Shiv G. Kapoor

Professor
Mechanical Science and Engineering,
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign,
Urbana, IL 61801
e-mail: sgkapoor@ilinois.edu

Anil K. Srivastava

Chief Technology Officer (CTO),
Manufacturing Research and Development,
Manufacturing Technology,
TechSolve Inc., Cincinnati, OH 45237
e-mail: srivastava@techsolve.org

Jon Iverson

Vice President (VP)
Machining Services,
Manufacturing Technology,
TechSolve Inc.,
Cincinnati, OH 45237
e-mail: iverson@techsolve.org

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received May 31, 2013; final manuscript received September 13, 2013; published online January 3, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Donggang Yao.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 136(2), 021004 (Jan 03, 2014) (12 pages) Paper No: MANU-13-1242; doi: 10.1115/1.4025504 History: Received May 31, 2013; Revised September 13, 2013

The atomization-based cutting fluid (ACF) spray system has been found to be effective for improving the tool life and overall productivity during the machining of titanium alloys like Ti–6Al–4 V. The aim of this research is to study droplet spray characteristics of an ACF spray system including droplet entrainment zone (e.g., angle and distance) and droplet-gas co-flow development regions with respect to three ACF spray parameters, viz., droplet and gas velocities, and spray distance. ACF spray experiments are performed by varying droplet and gas velocities. Machining experiments are performed in order to understand the effect of the droplet spray behavior on the machining performance, viz., tool life/wear, and surface roughness during turning of a titanium alloy, Ti–6Al–4 V. The flow development behavior with respect to the spray distance is studied by modeling the droplets entrainment mechanism. The model is validated by the ACF spray experiments. Experiments and the modeling of flow development behavior reveal that a higher droplet velocity and a smaller gas velocity result in smaller droplet entrainment angle leading to a gradual and early development of the co-flow, and a better distribution of the droplets across the jet flare. Machining experiments also show that a higher droplet velocity, a lower gas velocity and a longer spray distance significantly improve tool life and surface finish.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Photograph of the ACF spray unit [10]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Photographic images of ACF droplet-gas co-flow at: (a) Ud = 0.4 m/s, Ugx = 26 m/s; (b) Ud = 1.0 m/s, Ugx = 26 m/s; (c) Ud = 0.4 m/s, Ugx = 36 m/s; and (d) Ud = 1.0 m/s, Ugx = 36 m/s (scale: mm; gas nozzle exit is located at reading “10”; Ugx is measured at 35 mm distance from the gas exit point)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of a typical axisymmetric co-flow jet produced by a high-velocity gas and fluid droplets, and its flow evolution regions with respect to downstream position. (A–A, B–B, and C–C denote cross-sections at three different regions)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

(a) ACF spray parameters in turning setup; (b) Experimental setup with the ACF spray system in a CNC lathe (inset: cutting insert)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Photographs of tool rake and flank faces for Test no. 1 (Ud: 0.4 m/s, Ugx: 26 m/s, and Sd: 25 mm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Photographs of tool rake and flank faces for Test no. 2 (Ud: 1.0 m/s, Ugx: 26 m/s, and Sd: 25 mm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Photographs of tool rake and flank faces for Test no. 3 (Ud: 1.0 m/s, Ugx: 26 m/s, and Sd: 35 mm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Photographs of tool rake and flank faces for Test no. 4 (Ud: 1.0 m/s, Ugx: 36 m/s, and Sd: 35 mm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Average surface roughness, Ra; and (b) maximum surface roughness, Rz values at different machining times for different spray conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Friction coefficient values at different machining times for different ACF spray conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Variation of the droplet density across the jet flare at the same location A–A for: (a) smaller; and (b) larger droplet entrainment angles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

A typical velocity diagram for droplets in the droplet entrainment zone (Ur: resultant velocity)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Model-predicted entrainment behavior and entrainment angle of the ACF spray at: (a) Ud = 0.4 m/s, Ugx = 26 m/s; (b) Ud = 1.0 m/s, Ugx = 26 m/s; (c) Ud = 0.4 m/s, Ugx = 36 m/s; and (d) Ud = 1.0 m/s, Ugx = 36 m/s

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