2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0890-6955(02)00051-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The mechanisms of bell mouth formation in gundrilling when the drill rotates and the workpiece is stationary. Part 2: the second stage of drill entrance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This can be caused by insufficient backtaper applied during drill manufacturing and/or due to inaccuracies in the gundrilling system. Moreover, when static or entrance stability of the tool is insufficient [4,18,19], this edge experiences additional side cutting that leads to its rapid deterioration. This type of wear is the least desirable because a substantial amount of tool material should be ground on re-sharpening to restore the drill.…”
Section: Tool Wear Paternsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This can be caused by insufficient backtaper applied during drill manufacturing and/or due to inaccuracies in the gundrilling system. Moreover, when static or entrance stability of the tool is insufficient [4,18,19], this edge experiences additional side cutting that leads to its rapid deterioration. This type of wear is the least desirable because a substantial amount of tool material should be ground on re-sharpening to restore the drill.…”
Section: Tool Wear Paternsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Inferior drill design, alignment problems, and improper selection of the optimal bushing diameter causes drill entrance instability and thus bushing excessive wear, particularly in the region adjacent to the hole entrance. Moreover, it is found that, under the same feed, the length of the bell mouth (the tapered entrance part of drilled holes) is three to five times shorter and the diameter error is four to eight times smaller when using the newly-designed drills compare to the ordinary drill [18,19,21]. The level of vibrations during the tool entrance was estimated by the effective acceleration, which is measured using accelerometers installed on the workpiece.…”
Section: Test Resutlsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The preliminary gundrilling tests have shown [12] that the cutting regime (the cutting speed, v and feed, f) and the parameters of the tool geometry should be considered as the input variables. Tool life is to be considered as the output parameter.…”
Section: Design Matrixmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jung J [8] ,Wang Y [9] established a mathematical drilling force model of gun drills based on the energy principle and micro cutting tools, and the correctness of the model were verified by drilling experiments. Astakhov et al [10] studied the formation principle of trumpet mouth under gun drilling. Galitsky et al [11] established a tool life model for gun drilling by group data analysis method (GMDH) including tool angle parameters and process parameters, which was a relatively perfect tool life prediction model.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%