Advertisement

Effect of slide burnishing method on the surface integrity of AISI 316Ti chromium–nickel steel

  • J. T. Maximov
  • G. V. Duncheva
  • A. P. Anchev
  • N. Ganev
  • I. M. Amudjev
  • V. P. Dunchev
Technical Paper
  • 48 Downloads

Abstract

Chromium–nickel steels are widely used in various fields of the engineering practice because of their increased corrosion resistance. One of the most used chromium–nickel steel is AISI 316Ti. It is known from the engineering practice that processing this steel by cutting creates difficulties and problems. However, there is no information regarding the effectiveness of the slide burnishing (SB) method in terms of quality of the processed surface of this chromium–nickel steel. A comprehensive experimental and FEM study of the surface integrity of slide burnished specimens made of AISI 316Ti austenitic stainless steel has been carried out. The effect of the SB parameters on the obtained roughness, microhardness, residual stress, fatigue strength (life) and wear resistance has been studied. A fully coupled thermal-stress FEM analysis has been conducted to be appreciated the effect of the generated temperature in SB process on the residual stress formation. The SB of AISI 316Ti steel achieves: roughness of Ra = 0.055 μm; micro-hardness increased by more than 32%; significant wear resistance; introduced residual stress with a maximum absolute value, which significantly exceeds the yield limit of the bulk material; increased fatigue strength by 38.9%; fatigue life increasing more than 385 times. The obtained experimental outcomes for the main characteristics of the surface integrity prove that SB can be successfully applied as a mixed burnishing for finishing symmetrical rotational components made of chromium–nickel steels.

Keywords

AISI 316Ti steel Slide burnishing Surface integrity High-cycle fatigue performance Wear resistance Fully coupled thermal-stress FEM analysis 

List of symbols

ap

Cutting depth (mm)

A

Area (m2)

A5

Elongation (%)

c

Specific heat (J/kg/°C)

E

Young’s modulus (Pa)

f

Feed rate (mm/rev)

Fb

Burnishing force (N)

Ir

Specific wear resistance (Nm/mg)

k

Thermal conductivity (W/m/°C)

L

Friction path (m)

m

Mass wear (mg)

m0

Mass before friction (mg)

mi

Mass after friction path (mg)

n

Number of passes

Ni

Number of cycles to failure

P

Normal load (N)

qg

Heat flux density (W/m2)

r

Tool radius (mm)

Ra

Surface roughness (μm)

Rainit

Initial surface roughness (μm)

si

X-ray elastic constants (TPa−1)

v

Burnishing velocity (m/min)

z

Transverse contraction (%)

αt

Coefficient of thermal expansion (m/m/°C)

Δs

Slip increment (m)

Δt

Time increment (s)

ɛnom

Nominal strain

ɛln

Logarithmic strain

ɛlnp

Logarithmic plastic strain

η

Coefficient

θ

Temperature (°C)

ν

Poisson’s ratio

ρ

Density (kg/m3)

τ

Friction stress (Pa)

φi

Coefficients

σe

Fatigue limit (Pa)

σtrue

True stress (Pa)

σu

Ultimate stress (Pa)

σY

Yield limit (Pa)

ω

Angular velocity (s−1)

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Bulgarian Ministry of Education and Science and the Technical University of Gabrovo under contract no 1702M. The authors would like to thank Professor Mara Kandeva from the Technical University in Sofia for her help with the wear tests. The authors would also like to acknowledge Dr. Yosiph Mitev for fatigue test specimens preparation.

References

  1. 1.
    Ecoroll Catalogue (2006) Tools and solutions for metal surface improvement. Ecoroll Corporation Tool Technology, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Korzynski M (2009) A model of smoothing slide ball-burnishing and an analysis of the parameter interaction. J Mater Process Technol 209(1):625–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Korzynski M (2007) Modeling and experimental validation of the force-surface roughness relation for smoothing burnishing with a spherical tool. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 47(12):1956–1964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Maximov JT, Anchev AP, Duncheva GV, Ganev N, Selimov KF (2017) Influence of the process parameters on the surface roughness, micro-hardness and residual stresses in slide burnishing of high-strength aluminium alloys. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 39(8):3067–3078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maximov JT, Anchev AP, Dunchev VP, Ganev N, Duncheva GV, Selimov KF (2017) Effect of slide burnishing on fatigue performance of 2024-T3 high-strength aluminium alloy. Fatigue Fail Eng Mater Struct 40(11):1893–1904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saï BW, Lebrun JL (2003) Influence of finishing by burnishing on surface characteristics. J Mater Eng Perform 12(1):37–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shiou FJ, Hsu CC (2008) Surface finishing of hardened and tempered stainless tool steel using sequential ball grinding, ball burnishing and ball polishing processes on a machining centre. J Mater Process Technol 205(1–3):249–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tian Y, Shin YS (2007) Laser assisted burnishing of metals. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 47(1):14–22MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shiou FJ, Huang SJ, Shih AJ, Zhu J, Yoshino Y (2017) Fine surface finish of a hardened stainless steel using a new burnishing tool. Proc Manuf 10:208–217Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Labanowski J, Ossowska A (2006) Influence of burnishing on stress corrosion cracking susceptibility of duplex steel. J Achiev Mater Manuf Eng 19(1):46–52Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maximov JT, Anchev AP, Duncheva GV (2015) Modeling of the friction in tool-workpiece system in diamond burnishing process. Coupled Syst Mech 4(4):279–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. T. Maximov
    • 1
  • G. V. Duncheva
    • 1
  • A. P. Anchev
    • 1
  • N. Ganev
    • 2
  • I. M. Amudjev
    • 1
  • V. P. Dunchev
    • 1
  1. 1.Technical University of GabrovoGabrovoBulgaria
  2. 2.Czech Technical University in PraguePragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations