Submitted:
05 July 2024
Posted:
05 July 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Experimental Conditions and Procedures
2.1. Experimental Equipment and Tools
2.2. Experimental Plan
3. Experimental Results and Analysis
3.1. Impact of Cutting Velocity on Tool Wear
3.2. The Impact of Feed per Tooth on Tool Wear
3.3. The Influence of Milling Depth on Tool Wear
3.4. The Effect of Milling Width on Tool Wear
3.5. Analysis of Tool Wear Mechanism
3.5.1. Grain Abrasion
3.5.2. Adhesive Wear
3.5.3. Breaking and Spalling
4. Prediction Model and Parameter Optimization of Tool Wear in SiCp/Al Composite
4.1. Orthogonal Experimental Design and Result Analysis
4.2. Development of Tool Wear Model
4.3. Establishment of Multi-Objective Optimization Function and Optimization of Milling Parameters
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- HaiJiao Yu, XinGui Zhou, ChangRui Zhang. Research Progress of SiC Reflecting Mirror[J]. New Technology & New Process, 2006, (5): 26-30.
- Liu J W, Cheng K, Ding H. An Investigation of Surface Defect Formation in Micro Milling the 45% SiCp/Al Composite[J]. Procedia CIRP, 2016, 45(6): 211-214. [CrossRef]
- Min Li, AiQin Wang, JingPei Xie. The present research situation and progress of SiC particle-reinforced aluminum matrix composites[J]. Powder Metallurgy Industry,2015,25(03):55-60. [CrossRef]
- Weinert K A. Consideration of Tool Wear Mechanism When Machining Metal Matrix Composites (MMC)[J]. Annals of the CIRP, 2008, 42(1): 95-98. [CrossRef]
- Ernest G. Wolff. An Introduction to Metal Matrix Composites[J]. Materials Research Bulletin, 1995, 30(12). [CrossRef]
- DaoJun Lv. Research on SiCp/Al Composite Machining Technology[J]. Electro-Mechanical Engineering, 2011, 27(05): 29-32. [CrossRef]
- HuiTing Zha, PingFa Feng, JianFu Zhang. Wear characteristics of cutting tools in ultrasonic vibration-assisted scratching high volume fraction SiC particle reinforced aluminum matrix composites[J]. Journal of Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2019, 49(02): 458-465. [CrossRef]
- GuoHong Ma, JiaLi Zhang, Fan Yan. Finite element analysis of cutting process and surface formation of SiCp/Al composites under conventional and ultrasonic vibration assisted conditions[J]. Manufacturing Technology & Machine Tool, 2024(04): 51-56. [CrossRef]
- JinFeng Leng, GaoHui Wu. Status of Research on Machinability of SiCp/Al Composites[J]. Aerospace Materials & Technology, 2007, (02): 6-9.
- YuChao Wu, MiaoXian Guo, WeiCheng Guo. Surface Damage Formation Mechanism of SiCp/Al Composites Based on 2D Cutting[J]. Surface Technology, 2024, 53(08): 145-155. [CrossRef]
- Deng B, Peng F, Zhou L. A Comprehensive Study on Flank Wear Progression of Polycrystalline Diamond Micro-tool During Micro End-milling of SiCp/Al Composites[J]. Wear, 2020, 456-457. [CrossRef]
- Pradyut Kumar Swain, Kasinath Das Mohapatra, Pratyush Kumar Swain. Investigations, Analysis and Performance Comparison of Uncoated CNMG 120408 TTR and Coated 12040822 Carbide Tools during Dry Turning of Al-SiCp Nano Composites[J]. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2020, 26: 2. [CrossRef]
- Volodymyr Bushlya, Filip Lenrick, Oleksandr Gutnichenko. Performance and Wear Mechanisms of Novel Superhard Diamond and Boron Nitride Based Tools in Machining Al-SiCp Metal Matrix Composite[J]. Wear, 2017, 376-377. [CrossRef]
- QiuLin Niu, LingYan Tang, DaoHui Xiang. Study on tool wear of cemented carbide coated tool in milling of SiCp/Al composites[J]. Journal of Henan Polytechnic University(Natural Science), Jiaozuo, China, 2018, 37(04): 90-93+111. [CrossRef]
- JieQiong Lin, Ru Jia, Yan Zhou. PCD tool wear in cutting SiCp/6005Al composites[J]. Diamond & Abrasives Engineering, 2023, 43(03): 322-331. [CrossRef]
- WenLong Sun, WenTian Shi, YuDe Liu. Study on Tool Wear of Aramid Fiber Reinforced Plastic Composites in Micromilling[J]. Tool Engineering, 2021, 55(10): 35-40. [CrossRef]
- ZhanQiang Liu, Xing Ai. Wear Characteristics of Cutting Tools in High Speed Machining[J]. Tribology, 2002, 22(6): 468-471. [CrossRef]
- Xu Liang, ChongYan Cai, QingLong An. Cooling and Lubrication Performance of SCCO2 Mixed Oil Film with Water Droplets in TC4 Milling[J]. China Mechanical Engineering, 2020, 31(03): 328-335. [CrossRef]
- MengHua Gao, ChenLi Tao, Lei Shi. Data Analysis and Test of an Uniform Design Experiment Based SAS[J]. Journal of Ordnance Engineering College, 2015, 27(01): 6-9. [CrossRef]
















| Types of Elements | Weight Percentage(%) | Atomic Percentage(%) |
|---|---|---|
| Carbon | 9.43 | 19.59 |
| Magnesium | 0.51 | 0.47 |
| Aluminum | 43.13 | 34.7 |
| Silicon | 45.13 | 44.34 |
| Copper | 1.80 | 0.9 |
| Number | vc(m/min) | fz(mm/z) | ap(mm) | ae(mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 40 | 0.02 | 0.2 | 2 |
| 2 | 60 | 0.04 | 0.4 | 3 |
| 3 | 80 | 0.06 | 0.6 | 4 |
| 4 | 100 | 0.08 | 0.8 | 5 |
| Cutting environment | C(%) | Cu(%) | Mg(%) | Si(%) | O(%) | Al(%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry cutting | 8.35 | 0.02 | 00.68 | 18.36 | 5.96 | 26.67 |
| SCCO2-MQL ultrasonic vibration | 6.01 | 0.04 | 00.21 | 14.23 | 3.99 | 18.14 |
| Number | vc(m/min) | fz(mm/z) | ap(mm) | ae(mm) | VB(μm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 40 | 0.02 | 0.2 | 2 | 12.69 |
| 2 | 40 | 0.04 | 0.4 | 3 | 10.01 |
| 3 | 40 | 0.06 | 0.6 | 4 | 12.47 |
| 4 | 40 | 0.08 | 0.8 | 5 | 14.01 |
| 5 | 60 | 0.02 | 0.4 | 4 | 11.69 |
| 6 | 60 | 0.04 | 0.2 | 5 | 7.99 |
| 7 | 60 | 0.06 | 0.8 | 2 | 7.21 |
| 8 | 60 | 0.08 | 0.6 | 3 | 6.42 |
| 9 | 80 | 0.02 | 0.6 | 5 | 19.63 |
| 10 | 80 | 0.04 | 0.8 | 4 | 19.01 |
| 11 | 80 | 0.06 | 0.2 | 3 | 13.01 |
| 12 | 80 | 0.08 | 0.4 | 2 | 10.68 |
| 13 | 100 | 0.02 | 0.8 | 3 | 23.16 |
| 14 | 100 | 0.04 | 0.6 | 2 | 20.01 |
| 15 | 100 | 0.06 | 0.4 | 5 | 17.52 |
| 16 | 100 | 0.08 | 0.2 | 4 | 11.69 |
| Parameters | vc (m/min) | fz (mm/z) | ap (mm) | ae (mm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean value | |||||
| 12.295 | 16.7925 | 11.345 | 12.6475 | ||
| 8.3275 | 14.255 | 12.475 | 13.15 | ||
| 15.5825 | 12.5525 | 14.6325 | 13.715 | ||
| 18.095 | 10.7 | 15.8475 | 14.7875 | ||
| R | 9.7675 | 6.0925 | 4.5025 | 2.14 | |
| vc>fz>ap>ae | |||||
| Independent Variables | β1 | β2 | β3 | β4 | Significance of Regression Coefficients |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |vc| | |fz| | |ap| | |ae| | ||
| VB | 3.512 | 2.846 | 2.232 | 0.995 | β1>β2>β3>2.2010>β4 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).