10/7/2015

1
 10/7/2015

Down cut grinding

abrasive grains penetrate to a maximum depth
immediately after contacting the work piece

chip removal occurs at the beginning of contact
by an individual grain

penetration reduces to zero as the grains move
through the contact.

forces tend to be lower, and there are
advantages for surface roughness and reduced
wheel wear.

there is a greater initial impact between the
grain and the workpiece and a greater tendency
for grain micro-fracture.

Cooling is more efficient as fluid is carried into
the contact on the finished portion of the
workpiece

Upper cut grinding

The wheel rotates in the opposite direction so
that grain penetration steadily increases as the
grains pass through the contact.

an individual grain coming into contact rubs
against the work piece initially. Rubbing
continues for a greater extent than in down cut

chip removal is achieved later in the passage
through contact.

The grains have a greater tendency to become
blunt in up-cut grinding.

Higher grinding forces and higher wheel wear

2
 10/7/2015

the real depth of material, ae removed is much less

than the programmed depth of cut, ap.

It is necessary to measure the workpiece to
determine the actual depth of material removed

ac, is approximately a quarter of ap, depending on
the workpiece hardness

3
 10/7/2015

Other factors affecting depth of cut are

grinding wheel sharpness, machine tool
stiffness, grinding wheel stiffness, contact
width, work speed, and wheel speed.

All of these can affect grinding forces
substantially resulting in deflection x of a
system

Wheel wear as, reduces the real depth of cut
and thermal expansions xeXp of the workpiece
ae = ap - x - as + xeXp

Up cut surface grinding

Time, t per revolution = n.dw/ vw,

Programmed depth, ap= π.dw.vf/vw
where
Vf = in feed rate
Vw = work speed

4
 10/7/2015

Plunge cylindrical grinding

Programmed depth, ap = π.dw.vf/2.vw

The programmed depth of cut in horizontal surface

grinding is set by the machine operator first detecting
contact between the wheel and the work piece. The
machine operator then sets a down feed of 25 µm. At
the beginning of the pass, the grinding wheel surface
deflects upwards by 15 µm. The wheel has not had
time to wear and the work piece has not had time to
expand. At the end of the pass in horizontal surface
grinding, the grinding wheel has reduced in radius by 4
µm, the grinding wheel surface is deflected upwards
by 13 µm and the work piece has expanded by 1 µm
.What is the difference in real depth of cut along the
work piece length?

5
 10/7/2015

Required:
difference in real depth of cut, ae along the
work piece length
ae from starting of grinding – ae from the end
of process

Start ae = 25 - 15 - 0 + 0 = 10 µm
End ae = 25 - 13 - 4 + 1 = 9 µm

Start ae - End ae = 1 µm

Stiffness factor, K = ae / ap

Deflection x of a system depends on machine
stiffness, λ
X = Fn/λ

Fn depends on how hard it is to grind a
material

Fn = Ks.ae where Ks = grinding stiffness
X/ ae = Ks/ λ

From the equations, we obtained


K=
K

 s
λ

6
 10/7/2015

Ks

When = 1, then K = 0.5 = ae / ap
λ

Means that ac is half of ap

K signifies the characteristics of the machine

K = 0.4 represents a stiff machine and
moderate grinding forces

K = 0.1 represents a compliant machine and
high grinding forces

Size error is the difference between ap and ae

Size error in spark out:
E =ap x(1-K)n

Where n= number of passes

Increasing the number of spark-out passes,
increasing machine stiffness and reducing
grinding stiffness reduces the size error

Taking 12 spark-out passes with K = 0.25 reduces
the error down to 3.2% of ap

7
 10/7/2015

The wheel is given a down-feed of 25 µm in

horizontal surface grinding. The stiffness factor
is K = 0.3. After 10 spark-out passes without
further down-feed, what is the size error due to
system deflection?

Set depth of material removed, ap : 25 µm

Material removed after 1 pass: 25 x 0.3 = 7.5 µm
Size error after 1 pass: 25 - 7.5 = 17.5 µm
Size error, e = 25 x (1 - 0.3)10 = 0.7 1 µm

In horizontal surface grinding, the wheel is

given a downfeed of 25 µm before each pass.
The stiffness factor K is 0.3. After a large
number of down-feeding passes, what will be
the size error due to deflections?

After a large number of passes, the real depth of

cut is equal to the down-feed per pass, therefore
ae = 25 µm

K = ae / ap
0.3 = ae / 25 , ap = 83 µm
The size error is therefore 83 - 25 = 58 µm

8
 10/7/2015


heq = ae .


The real depth of cut after a number of revolutions

of the workpiece in a plunge cylindrical grinding
operation is 10 µm. The grinding wheel speed is 60
m/s and the work speed is 0.3 m/s. What is the
equivalent chip thickness?


heq = ae . 


.
= 10x10-6m . 

= 0.05 x10-6m

9
 10/7/2015

Removal rate per unit width is known as specific

removal rate Q’.

Using the specific removal rate reduces the
number of variables and allows direct comparison
of removal efficiency across a wide range of
operation

The width of grinding contact in a horizontal

surface grinding machine is 15 µm, the real
depth of cut is 10 µm) and the work speed is 300
mm/s .What is the removal rate and what is the
specific removal rate?

Removal rate, Q = 15 x 0.0 10 x 300 = 45 mm3/s

Specific removal rate, Q' = 0.010 x 300 = 3

mm3/mm s or 3 mm2/s

10
 10/7/2015

The grinding energy required to remove a

volume of material is given by the grinding
power P divided by the removal rate Q.

ec =


The maximum grinding power in steady grinding after

subtracting the no-load power and the power required
to accelerate the grinding fluid has a mean value of 2
kW. The removal rate is 50 mm3/s. What is the specific
grinding energy?
eC = 2000 / 50 = 40 J/mm3

The normal and axial feed speeds vfn, and vfa ,

respectively, are much smaller than the wheel speed
vs so that grinding power is given quite closely by
Ft.vs.

11
 10/7/2015

Grindingforce ratio gives indirect information

about the efficiency of grinding
µ = Ft / Fn

Calculate the specific energy and force ratio at 15 µm

depth of cut for 0.3 m/s work speed and for 30 µm
depth of cut at 0.1 m/s work speed using the values in
Figure for grinding grey cast iron with an alumina
grinding wheel at 30m/s.

typical grinding forces when grinding a grey cast iron with a

medium size 60 mesh grit alumina wheel using 2% synthetic
oil in water emulsion as the grinding fluid.

12
 10/7/2015

Calculate the specific energy and force ratio at 15 µm

depth of cut for 0.3 m/s work speed and for 30 µm
depth of cut at 0.1 m/s work speed using the values
in Figure for grinding grey cast iron with an alumina
grinding wheel at 30m/s.

at vw = 300mm/s and ae = 0.015 mm:

Q = 300 x 0.015 x 15 = 67.5 mm3/s
Ft = 110 N: P = 110 x 30 = 3300 W
ec = 3300/67.5 = 48.9 J/mm3
Fn = 265 N
Grinding force ratio: µ = 1 10/265 = 0.41

At vw = 0.1 m/s and ae = 0.030 mm:

Q = 100 x 0.03 x 15 = 45 mm3/s
Ft = 97 N: P = 97 x 30 = 2910 W
Specific energy: ec = 2910/45 = 64.7 J/mm3
Fn = 235 N
Grinding force ratio: µ = 97/235 = 0.41

Note:

Removal rate was 50% higher at the higher work
speed.

Specific energy was 32% higher at the lower work
speed.

This confirms that higher removal rates are much
more efficient.

no changes at the two different removal rates
suggesting that wheel sharpness was unchanged

13
 10/7/2015

Typical forces for wet and dry grinding, obtained from grinding a
general-purpose medium carbon steel with a fine 200 mesh grit CBN
wheel

Calculate the specific energy and force ratio at a 20

µm depth of cut for dry grinding and for wet grinding
using the values in Figure for grinding AISI 1055 with a
CBN grinding wheel.

Dry grinding
Q = 100 x 0.020 x 15 = 30 mm3/s
Ft = 84.5 N
vs = 30 m/s
P = 84.5 x 30 = 2535 W
Specific energy: ec = 2535/30 = 84.5 J/mm3
Fn = 133 N
Grinding force ratio: µ = 84.5/133 = 0.63

14
 10/7/2015

Wet grinding
Ft=49N
P = 49 x 30 = 1470 W
Specific energy: ec = 1470/30 = 49 J/mm3
Fn = 93 N
Grinding force ratio: µ = 49/93 = 0.53

NOTE:
Specific energy was lower in wet grinding due to
the lubrication of the cutting action

In general, specific energy was lower when a

very sharp CBN wheel was used as compared to
when a less sharp alumina wheel was employed.

The sharpness of the CBN wheel in Problem 7 is
confirmed by high values of grinding force ratio.

The force ratio indicates that the tangential
force is high in comparison to the normal force.

The tangential force is the force more directly
removing material whereas the normal force has
to make the wheel grains penetrate into the
work piece.

A blunt wheel increases the normal force more
rapidly than the tangential force.

15
 10/7/2015

In practice, there are constraints on the

removal rate, such as machine power
available, machine capability, accuracy
required, heat generation, material
characteristics and wheel wear

Process optimization requires that machining
conditions are selected within the process
limits

High grinding wheel speeds allow higher in-
feed to be employed for the same grinding
forces and thus allow higher removal rates.

Process limits define the permissible range of speed

conditions for stable grinding

high work speeds increase the probability of
chatter and low work speeds increase the
probability of burn

Low work speeds concentrate the process energy in
the contact zone longer, resulting in thermal
damage.

However, increasing wheel speed without changing
other grinding conditions will reduce efficiency and
will not increase removal rate

The aim is to increase efficiency by reducing
specific energy, increase removal rates, and
maintain work piece quality

16