Advertisement

Voxel and Finite Element Modeling of Twist Drill

  • E. I. ShchurovaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)

Abstract

Digitalization of an engineering process necessitates the development and application of digital models of all the technological systems elements, including cutting tools. Such digital models have to include geometric models of tool surfaces and models for physical modeling, for example, finite element or SPH models based on geometry. Digitalization also results in the evolution of universal approaches to model development of entity sets of cutting tools. At present time, two approaches to geometric modeling are used: analytical solid modeling and discrete solid modeling. The latter type of modeling, based on algebra of sets, is more flexible and more computationally stable. Universal models of thread-cutting tools have been developed by this time. However, discrete models of such widely used tools as twist drills have not been worked out still. The objective of the presented paper is to develop voxel and finite element models of standard twist drills with solid body. The developed twist drills model make it possible to obtain sets of tool surface points and to calculate finite element meshes. The model is suitable for twist drills of any design presented by the state standards of the Russian Federation (with the exception of drills with thinned chisel edge).

Keywords

Twist drill Voxel FEA Parametric model Discrete solid modeling 

References

  1. 1.
    Vila C, Abellan-Nebot JV, Albinan JC, Hernandez G (2015) An approach to sustainable product lifecycle management (Green PLM). Procedia Eng 132:585–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Xu X (2009) Integrating advanced computer-aided design, manufacturing, and numerical control: principles and implementations. IGI Global, 424 pGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    GOST 27.004-85 Industrial product dependability. Technological systems. Terms and definitions, 13 pGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Astakhov VP (2010) Geometry of single-point turning tools and drills: fundamentals and practical applications. Springer, 584 pGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sambhav K, Tandon P, Dhande SG (2012) Geometric modeling and validation of twist drills with a generic point profile. Appl Math Model 36:2384–2403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sambhav K, Dhande SG, Tandon P (2010) CAD based mechanistic modeling of forces for generic drill point geometry. Comput Aided Des Appl 7(6):809–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hsieh J-F, Lin PD (2005) Drill point geometry of multi-flute drills. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 26:466–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jovanovic JD, Spaic O (2012) Geometric modeling of twist drills. In: 16th international research/expert conference “Trends in the development of machinery and associated technology, pp 115–118Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jerard RB, Angleton JM, Drysdale RL, Su P (1990) The use of surface points sets for generation, simulation, verification and automatic correction of NC machining programs. In: Proceedings of NSF design and manufacturing systems conference, pp 143–150Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lynn R, Dinar M, Huang N et al (2018) Direct digital subtractive manufacturing of a functional assembly using voxel-based models. J Manuf Sci Eng 140:021006–2–021006-14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shchurov IA (2004) Teoriya rascheta tochnosti obrabotki i parametrov instrumentov na osnove diskretnogo tverdotel’nogo modelirovaniya (The theory of precision machinery and tools parameters calculation on the base of discrete solid modelling). SUSU, Chelyabinsk, 320 p. http://lib.susu.ru/ftd?base=SUSU_METHOD&key=000436340&dtype=F&etype=.pdf
  12. 12.
    Makhecha A, Thangaraj A R, Sutherland JW (1994) Prediction of drilling thrust and torque using a mechanistic model calibrated through non-linear optimization. Manuf Sci Eng, ASME Bound Volume—PED 68(1):237–244Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Abele E, Fujara M (2010) Simulation-based twist drill design and geometry optimization. CIRP Ann 59(1):145–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heisel U, Zaloga W, Krivoruchko D, Storchak M, Goloborodko L (2013) Modelling of orthogonal cutting processes with the method of smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Prod Eng Res Devel 7:639–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wu J, Yu G, Wang D, Zhang Y, Wang CCL (2009) Voxel-based interactive haptic simulation of dental drilling. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2009 international design engineering technical conferences & computers and information in engineering conference, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uner G, Konukseven EI (2010) Development of a novel 6DOF multi-contact material cutting model for visiohaptic rendering applications. Int J Des Eng 3(3):260–275Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang C, Liu X, Fang J, Zhou L (2011) A new tool wear estimation method based on shape mapping in the milling process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 53:121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lynn R, Contis D, Hossain M et al (2017) Voxel model surface offsetting for computer-aided manufacturing using virtualized high-performance computing. J Manuf Syst 43:296–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    GOST 15543-74 Twist drills with cylindrical shank for working of light alloys. Middle series. Design, 8 pGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oancea N, Popa I, Teodor VG, Oancea VG (2010) Tool profiling for generation of discrete helical surfaces. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 50:37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Radzevich SP (2014) Generation of surfaces. Kinematic geometry of surface machining. CRC Press, 724 pGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.South Ural State UniversityChelyabinskRussia

Personalised recommendations