John A. Webster, PhD Cool-Grind Technologies Ashford, CT
www.cool-grind.com
QualityScan U
nlike machining processes such as milling and turning, grinding wheels do not present a defined cutting edge to the chip-forming contact zone. The abrasive grain can have a positive rake, nega- tive rake, a variety of tip radii, and may possess wear flats. The cutting edges are also much smaller than with cutting tools, with a greater number around the periphery, giving a chip size much smaller than in machining. For the same volume of material removed by grinding as with machining, the multitude of small grinding chips requires significantly more cutting energy than much fewer but larger machining chips. This phenomena is defined by specific grinding (or cutting) energy, and partly explains why grinding is more prone to workpiece surface integrity issues than machining. Thermal damage of the finished workpiece surface includes visible burn, thermal softening, re-hardening, tensile residual stresses, and phase-transformations.
Achieving effective cooling during the grinding process requires the grinding fluid to be transported through the chip removal zone using the porosity within the wheel structure. Wheel porosity depends on the type of bond used and the structure of the wheel. High power grinding processes, such as creep-feed grinding, can only control thermal damage when very open wheel structures are used to transport the coolant through the pro- cess. Regardless of the degree of porosity, ensuring that the coolant fills as much of the pores as possible is paramount to achieving effective cooling of the process. Many grinding machines in use today supply excessive flow- rate, low pressure coolant through large nozzle apertures, with an internal geometry which produces dispersed jets entrained with air. The boundary layer of air that surrounds a rotating grinding wheel can become a barrier to filling the porosity of the wheel. A proven strat- egy for penetrating the air barrier is to increase the jet speed close to the speed of the grinding wheel surface. If the wheel speed is 6,000 feet per minute this only requires a pressure of 60 psi at the nozzle, but higher wheel speeds will require a greater pressure. The nozzle aperture has to be designed to create this pressure without excessive flowrate, and be within the performance curve of the pump. The plumbing that links the nozzle to the pump can also dramatically reduce the pressure at the nozzle, a 50% drop is not uncommon.
14
ManufacturingEngineeringMedia.com | July 2014
Using More Effective Coolant Application to Improve Grinding Quality
The flow-rate of coolant required to fill the porosity of the grinding wheel and also perform some bulk cooling of the workpiece only needs to be within the range of 1.5-2 GPM per grinding horsepower. Therefore a 5 horsepower spindle load will require a flow-rate between 7.5–10 GPM, de- pending on the wheel abrasive type and process used. If the grinding wheel is 1” wide, and 60 psi at 10 GPM is required, a nozzle aperture of just 0.04” x 1” is needed. If the nozzle is designed with a coherent-jet internal geometry the jet will hit the wheel as a ribbon as compared to a spray.
Optimization of coolant application can cost less than 1% of the grinding system, but has the potential for huge benefits.
The ability to control thermal damage with more effective coolant application allows the process engineer to manipulate feeds, speeds, grit size, and dressing parameters to better achieve surface finish. Reducing the chip thickness in grinding will typically improve the surface finish of the finished part. To achieve this, the wheel speed can be raised, grit size decreased, or a finer dressing lead and/or compensation can be used. All three strategies will raise the grinding energy and the possibility of grind- ing burn. More effective coolant application will allow greater control of process parameters to control surface finish with reduced risk of damage. The structure of a grinding wheel can become clogged (loaded) with workpiece material reducing the porosity. Whilst the loading can be re- duced by more frequent wheel dressing, this is not an economical strategy since wheel life will be reduced. Coherent-jet nozzles will hit the grinding wheel surface with more impact energy than dispersed jets and help keep the wheel cleaner, allowing better cooling and control of the process. High- pressure cleaning jets at a pressure of over 500 psi are a more effective option but require an additional HP coolant pump and special nozzles to be integrated into the wheel-head.
As compared to the cost of the grinding machine, filter system, grind- ing wheel consumption, coolant disposal, etc, optimization of coolant application can cost less than 1% of the grinding system, but has the potential for huge economic and quality benefits. ME
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208