Prediction of vibration amplitude from machining parameters by response surface methodology in end milling
- 535 Downloads
Decreasing vibration amplitude during end milling process reduces tool wear and improves surface finish. Mathematical model has been developed to predict the acceleration amplitude of vibration in terms of machining parameters such as helix angle of cutting tool, spindle speed, feed rate, and axial and radial depth of cut. Central composite rotatable second-order response surface methodology was employed to create a mathematical model, and the adequacy of the model was verified using analysis of variance. The experiments were conducted on aluminum Al 6063 by high-speed steel end mill cutter, and acceleration amplitude was measured using FFT analyzer. The direct and interaction effect of the machining parameter with vibration amplitude were analyzed, which helped to select process parameter in order to reduce vibration, which ensures quality of milling.
KeywordsResponse surface FFT analyzer Analysis of variance Vibration monitoring
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Hayajneh MT, Tahat MS, Bluhm J (2007) A study of the effects of machining parameters on the surface roughness in the end-milling process. Jordan Journal of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering 1(1):1–5Google Scholar
- 14.Nakagawa H, Kurita Y, Ogawa K, Sugiyama Y, Hasegawa H (2008) Experimental analysis of chatter vibration in end-milling using laser Doppler vibrometers. Int J Automot Technol 2(6):431–438Google Scholar
- 15.Rahim IA, Miskam MA, Sidek O, Zaharudin SA, Mohd SKK (2009) Development of a vibration measuring unit using a microelectromechanical system accelerometer for machine condition monitoring. European Journal of Scientific Research 35(1):150–158, ISSN 1450-216XGoogle Scholar
- 17.Balachandran B, Zhao MX (2000) A mechanics based model for study of dynamics of milling operations. Meccanica 35(89–109):2000Google Scholar
- 20.Stephenson DA, Agapiou JS (2006) Metal cutting theory and practice. Taylor & Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 21.Cochran WG, Cox GM (1963) Experimental design. Asia Publishing, IndiaGoogle Scholar
- 22.Montgomery DC (1976) Design and analysis of experiments. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 23.Donaldson C, Lecain GH, Goold VC (1957) Tool design. Tata McGraw-Hill, New DelhiGoogle Scholar