2016
DOI: 10.1007/s00170-016-8567-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance comparison of wiper and conventional ceramic inserts in hard turning of AISI 4140 steel: analysis of machining forces and flank wear

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
19
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
7
19
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…According to Table 4 , the level of agreement between the experimental and the numerical results for F main is high. Furthermore, based on the findings of Aouici et al [ 24 ] the experimental analysis of the machining components for the next indicative conditions: V c = 115 m/min, f = 0.11 mm/rev, and ap = 0.30 mm showed an increased correlation with the equivalent simulated results that were derived from the present study. That is, F r = 202.3 N, F t = 146.0 N, and F a = 86.6 N for the experiments and F r = 214.4 N, F t = 137.5 N, and F a = 77.4 N for the simulations, leading to an estimated relative error of 6.0%, −5.8%, and −10.6%, respectively.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 75%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…According to Table 4 , the level of agreement between the experimental and the numerical results for F main is high. Furthermore, based on the findings of Aouici et al [ 24 ] the experimental analysis of the machining components for the next indicative conditions: V c = 115 m/min, f = 0.11 mm/rev, and ap = 0.30 mm showed an increased correlation with the equivalent simulated results that were derived from the present study. That is, F r = 202.3 N, F t = 146.0 N, and F a = 86.6 N for the experiments and F r = 214.4 N, F t = 137.5 N, and F a = 77.4 N for the simulations, leading to an estimated relative error of 6.0%, −5.8%, and −10.6%, respectively.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 75%
“…The numerical simulations were performed with the aid of DEFORM™-3D FEA software so that a FE model could be established. Moreover, a comparison between the experimental results found in the literature [ 24 ] and the numerical ones was conducted for validation purposes. Finally, after validating the FE model, a statistical model based on the response surface methodology (RSM) was developed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because the verification of the generated models is a time-consuming process, the test setup was prepared according to widely-used parameters and settings. The selected cutting tool, material and cutting conditions, have already been successfully studied [30][31][32] and thus, were chosen for this study. The test framework is shown in Figure 7.…”
Section: Testing Of the Generated Cutting Tool Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 3 contains the results of the nine numerical tests compared to the equivalent experimental ones. The experimental values were obtained from the literature [32]. The turning experiments were carried out with the aid of a universal lathe type SN 40C and the tool-holder with ISO designation number PCBNR2525M12.…”
Section: J Manuf Mater Process 2020 4 X For Peer Review 11 Of 15mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the authors [ 138 ], the physical measurements of the estimation with artificial neural network are appropriate. Aouici et al [ 139 ] compared the FW for the wiper ceramic insert with the traditional ceramic insert in dry hard turning of AISI 4140 steel. Analysis of variance was carried out in this study, and cutting speed, feed rate and depth of cut were also used as variables.…”
Section: Indirect Tool Condition Monitoring Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%