Research Papers

Role of Temperature Parameters in Achieving Precision Traverse Cylindrical Grinding of Chrome-Plated Ferrous Metal Rolls

[+] Author and Article Information
Ellis Taylor

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Sheffield,
Mappin Street,
Sheffield S1 3JD, UK
e-mail: ellis.taylor@sheffield.ac.uk

Tom Slatter

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Sheffield,
Mappin Street,
Sheffield S1 3JD, UK
e-mail: tom.slatter@sheffield.ac.uk

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received March 31, 2017; final manuscript received September 8, 2017; published online November 2, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Xun Chen.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 139(12), 121012 (Nov 02, 2017) (10 pages) Paper No: MANU-17-1204; doi: 10.1115/1.4037889 History: Received March 31, 2017; Revised September 08, 2017

This work considered the finishing precision grinding process at a small ferrous metal roll manufacturer. A design of experiments (DOE) methodology was used to evaluate the process and ascertain whether the degree of confidence gained from the process offers an acceptable level of risk in the conformance of end products to customer requirements. A thorough identification of the process variables and measurement considerations relevant to the process was carried out, before assessing and categorizing these variables using the grinding cycle as a “black box” system. Coolant temperature, environment temperature, work speed, and traverse speed were all considered against measured size change, surface finish, and circular run-out in a full factorial experimental design. The experiments were carried out on a manual cylindrical grinding machine retrofitted with digital encoders on the driven axes, with a chrome-plated roll 300 mm in diameter as the workpiece. Experiments were conducted over a period of 11 months during which the machine used was part of ongoing production environment. The results show that control of temperature, both of the coolant and of the environment in which the machine was operated, was the most important of the variables studied, but the skill of the machine operator remains dominant in the process overall.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Montgomery, D. , 2001, Design and Analysis of Experiments, 5th ed., Wiley, New York.
Bell, S. , 2001, Good Practice Guide No. 11 Issue 2—A Beginners Guide to Uncertainty of Measurement, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, UK, p. 41.
SAE, 2015, “ Measurement Systems Analysis Requirements for the Aero Engine Supply Chain,” SAE International, Warrendale, PA Standard No. AS 13003. http://standards.sae.org/as13003/
ISO, 2013, “ Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)—Inspection by Measurement of Workpieces and Measuring Equipment—Part 1: Decision Rules for Proving Conformity or Nonconformity With Specifications,” International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. 14253-1 2013. https://www.iso.org/standard/63638.html
Marinescu, I. , Hitchiner, M. , and Uhlmann, E. , 2006, Handbook of Machining With Grinding Wheels, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. [CrossRef]
Rowe, W. B. , 2009, Principles of Modern Grinding Technology, William Andrew Publishing, Norwich, NY.
Malkin, S. , and Guo, C. , 2008, Grinding Technology: Theory and Applications of Machining With Abrasives, 2nd ed., Industrial Press, New York.
Farago, F. T. , 1976, Abrasive Method Engineering, Industrial Press, New York.
Tonshoff, H. K. , Peters, J. , Inasaki, I. , and Paul, T. , 1992, “ Modelling and Simulation of Grinding Processes,” Ann. CIRP, 41(2), pp. 677–688. [CrossRef]
Malkin, S. , and Anderson, R. , 1974, “ Thermal Aspects of Grinding—Part 1: Energy Partition,” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 96(4), pp. 1177–1183. [CrossRef]
Malkin, S. , and Guo, C. , 2007, “ Thermal Analysis of Grinding,” CIRP Ann.-Manuf. Technol., 56(2), pp. 760–782. [CrossRef]
Met Office, 2016, “ UK and Regional Series,” Met Office, Devon, UK, accessed June 8, 2017, http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/summaries/datasets
Malkin, S. , and Anderson, R. , 1974, “ Thermal Aspects of Grinding—Part 2: Surface Temperatures and Workpiece Burn,” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 96(4), pp. 1184–1191. [CrossRef]
Marinescu, I. , 2004, Tribology of Abrasive Cutting Processes, William Andrew Publishing, Norwich, NY.
United States Department of Defense, 1978, “ Grinding of Chrome Plated Steel and Steel Parts Heat Treated to 180,00 Psi or Over,” United States Department of Defense, Virginia, Standard No. MIL-STD-866B. http://everyspec.com/MIL-STD/MIL-STD-0800-0899/MIL_STD_866B_911/
Kruszyński, B. W. , and Lajmert, P. , 2005, “ An Intelligent Supervision System for Cylindrical Traverse Grinding,” CIRP Ann.-Manuf. Technol., 54(1), pp. 305–308. [CrossRef]
Alagumurthi, N. , Palaniradja, K. , and Soundararajan, V. , 2006, “ Optimization of Grinding Process Through Design of Experiment (DOE)—A Comparative Study,” Mater. Manuf. Processes, 21(1), pp. 19–21. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/AMP-200060605
Malkin, S. , and Lenz, E. , 1978, “ Burning Limit for Surface and Cylindrical Grinding of Steels,” Ann. CIRP, 27(1), pp. 233–236.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Grinding process used in this work

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Probe placement and measurement positions schematic

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Illustration of the correct probe placement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Experimental run combinations used

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Setup of chrome test roller between centers

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Workpiece diameter and change in roll diameter after each run

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

(a) Pareto (α = 0.05) and (b) main effects chart for size change

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Mean temperature per month for the north of England, modified from Ref. [12]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Temperature data for the period July 2015–June 2016 for measurement room

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Temperature data for the period July 2015–June 2016 for machine used

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Circular run-out measurements made and the changes between them for each run

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Pareto (α = 0.05) and (b) main effects chart for the run-out

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Surface roughness for each run and the change in the surface roughness between each run

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

(a) Pareto (α = 0.05) and (b) main effects chart for the surface roughness




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