Taqwa Gilani

Creepfeed Grinding Corporate Application Engineer

Precision Customer Seminar 2016
Creepfeed Grinding

• Creepfeed grinding is one of the

most promising developments in
advanced precision grinding.
• As compared to the conventional
pendulum surface grinding, it
provides a great potential to
increase productivity and accuracy
at the same time.
• It has been a breakthrough in the
case of deep and/or profiled slot
grinding in difficult to machine
materials.
• It offers an improved stability of
thermal effects in the work surface.
Creepfeed Grinding
True Creepfeed Grinding
The Seven Keys To Successful Creepfeed Grinding

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link

1.Machine
2.Workpiece
3.Coolant System
4.Wheel Selection
5.Dressing
6.Grinding Parameters
7.Understanding The Outputs
Machine

• H.P. Requirements
• Spindle Bearings
• Automatic Wheel Balancing
• Fixturing, Calculating The Grinding Forces For Fixture Design
• How level Is Your Machine?
Machine – H.P. Requirements

Three main components in Creepfeed grinding

• Grinding Power
– Specific Energy
– Power Flux
• Thermal Damage

• Component Dimensional Accuracy

• Surface Finish
Machine – H.P. Requirements

• Specific Energy-the efficiency parameter

•The energy required to remove a unit amount of workpiece material.
• Serves as a measure of efficiency of the process.
• Specific energy = Grinding power
Metal removal rate
• The units of specific energy are Joules per cubic millimeter, Jmm-3
(Btu/in3).
Machine – H.P. Requirements

• Power Flux-the burn criterion

• The amount of power generated per unit area of the arc of contact
between the wheel and the workpiece.
• Power flux = Grinding power
Area of the arc of contact
Machine – H.P. Requirements

• No Hard and fast calculations

• Rule of thumb based on experience
– 20-25HP per inch width of grinding wheel
– Exception: High performance products that actually lower specific energy
allow for higher metal removal rates increasing the overall HP
requirement, for this and other variables it is prudent to oversize main
spindle motors where possible to anticipate future process changes
• Applying this basic rule to a 4” wide wheel would necessitate a HP
requirement of 80-100HP
Machine – Spindle Bearings

• Spindle bearings
• Generally Long lasting life
• “Harmless” crash can result in constant “grinding problems”
• Recognizing and rectifying grinding problems caused by damaged or
worn spindle packages is critical to the grinding system
Machine – Automatic Wheel Balancing

Control Vibration Sensor Balance Head

Machine – Automatic Wheel Balancing

• Principle of mass compensation for wheel imbalance

• The balance head contains two movable eccentric weights, each
weight is driven by electric motors through a precision gear train.
These weights can be repositioned to offset any imbalance in a
grinding wheel
• Imbalance or vibration is picked up by the sensor
– The signal is fed to the controller, which filters the signal by RPM. The
controller then drives the two balance head weights in the direction that
reduces the amplitude of the vibration signal. When the weights are
positioned so the lowest vibration level is reached, the balance cycle is
complete
Machine – Automatic Wheel Balancing

Unbalanced Balanced
Machine – Fixturing

• Rigid fixturing required due to forces exerted

• Bulky fixturing is not necessary
Machine – Fixturing
(Applies to all forms of grinding, i.e., surface, I.D. O.D. and Creepfeed)
Known:
Watts = H.P.
746
1 H.P. = 33,000 Foot-Pounds/min.
1. Determine power draw during grind with Watt Meter or measure horsepower and convert to
Watts. (Always use peak power draw.)
2. Divide this value by inches of contact width to get power per inch.
Watts
3. F Tangential = Ft.Lbs./min. X (Power, inch) = Pounds
Watts/H.P. (Vc Feet) Inch
Min
4. Coefficient of Friction or cutting force ratio
 = Ft’  .33  Fn’ = 3 x Ft
Fn’
5. Fn’ = Force Exerted on workpiece x Pounds
Inch width of contact
6. Multiply this value by actual contact width to obtain total force exerted on work-piece.
Machine – Fixturing

Example:
Power draw 8000 watts, contact width1.5 inches, Vc = 5000 S.F.P.M.
Ft’ = 33000 X (8000/1.5) = 47.2 Lbs
746 (5000) inch
Ft’ = (47.2 Lbs) X (1.5 inch) = 70.8 Lbs tangential force
inch exerted on workpiece
Fn’ = 3 x (47.2) = 141.6 pounds
inch
Fn’ = (141.6 Lbs) X (1.5 inch) = 212.4 Lbs normal force
inch exerted on workpiece
Machine – How Level is Your Machine?

• An out of level machine causes problems such as surface finish

inconsistencies, size holding, chatter marks, wheel breakdown etc.
• All O.E.M’s specify their recommended maximum out of level
condition however a good rule of thumb is a maximum of 0.0002”/foot
in both “X”&”Z” axis
Workpiece

- Material
- Hardness
- Stock Allowance
- Grinding Task
- Surface Finish
Workpiece - Material

• Important aspect in selecting an abrasive that is both suited to the

material and throughput estimates
• White friable Aluminum Oxide for Creepfeed industry
• Blocky pink/purple Aluminum Oxide (86A) for grinding 300 series Steel
• SiC for Gamma Titanium Aluminide

• For higher throughput, higher performance abrasives should be

considered such as Ceramic Aluminum Oxide
• Wheel cost are significantly higher than conventional Aluminum Oxide
• ROI is significant as high performance products typically lower overall
total costs
Workpiece - Hardness

• Soft, gummy materials

– Load the porous structure of the Creepfeed wheel
– In many cases as with Inconel are highly susceptible to thermal damage.
– If possible, use of coarse grit sizes and very open structures is required.
• Harder materials
– With the exception of extremely hard and/or exotic materials are
generally easier to grind.
– Finer grit sizes are utilized to penetrate the material as grinding
threshold forces are higher when grinding harder materials.
Workpiece – Stock Allowance

Creepfeed Grinding:
•Is not a finishing process
•It’s a machining process that in terms of MRR (Metal Removal Rate)
compete with Milling and Broaching.
•Often thermal damage issues while grinding have been eliminated by
increasing the D.O.C. (Depth Of Cut), creating a longer arc of contact
distributing the grinding forces over a larger area.
•Generally speaking productivity improvements usually begin to be seen
at a minimum of 1/32” (0.031”) D.O.C.
Workpiece – Surface Finish

• Deciding factor
– Grinding wheel selection
– Dressing parameters
– Machine operating parameters
Coolant System

• Type Of Coolant And Concentration

• Wheel Scrubbers
• Temperature And Chillers
• Coolant Ramps
• Nozzle Design
Coolant System – Type Of Coolant &
Concentration

• Improve grinding performance in Creepfeed Grinding by

• Lowering grinding forces and power requirements
• Increasing wheel life

• Types of coolants
• Oil
• Synthetic
• Semi-Synthetic
Coolant System – Wheel Scrubbers

Diamond
Scrubber Roll
Nozzle

Grinding
Wheel
Coolant System – Wheel Scrubbers

• Wheel scrubber nozzles are a proven contributing factor to the

grinding process
• A test was conducted to determine the effects of using wheel
scrubbers
Measured Power for Each Grind
35
light BURN light
burn No burn burn
30

G rinding Power (hp)

25

20

15

10

0
Grind 1 Grind 2 Grind 3 Grind 4
after dress repeat #1, re-dress, repeat #3, after
no dress repeat #1 pressure wash
Coolant System – Wheel Scrubbers

Run 3:
Heavy
burn. Run 1: After dressing. No burn.
After dressing.

Run 2:
No dressing
after Run 1. Run 4:
After pressure
washing
(no dressing).

Light burn. Light burn.

Coolant System – Temperature And Chillers

• Lower coolant temperatures improve grinding performance

• Lower grinding forces and power requirements are a result along
with increased wheel life and improved surface finishes
• Dimensional inaccuracy can be caused by high temperatures
Coolant System – Temperature And Chillers

MRR` vs F’n
Slight Burn
1.2

90°F Temp.
MRR` (In”3 /Min., Inch)

1.0
77°F Temp.
0.8 73°F Temp.
77°F
86°F
0.6

0.4
30% improved MRR at 77°F Vs. 90°F implying at the lower coolant temp the
wheel cut freer by giving higher MRR per unit normal force and is most
0.2 apparent at the higher table speeds of 7.5 and 10 I.P.M.

0.0
0.0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Heavy Duty Water Soluble Oil 3% in Water
Fn’ (LB/Inch) Slot: .125” D.O.C., 1/2” Wide, 8” L.O.C
S.P.D. Dress .020 Lead, .002 Comp.
38A60-FVCF, 4140 Steel Rc 45, Vs = 5500 F.P.M.
Coolant System – Coolant Ramps
Coolant System – Coolant Ramps

• Unable to maintain coolant flow through the end of the arc of cut
causes coolant starvation in the arc of contact
• The coolant ramp built into the fixture, helps to hold a volume of
coolant in place through to the end of the cut
• As the grinding wheel exits the cut, there is less bulk of workpiece
material which can act as a heat sink. Without a coolant ramp heat
from the grinding is conducted into the workpiece material as the
wheel exits the cut
Coolant System – Coolant Ramps

The heat causes:

The material to expand into the grinding wheel
– The wheel machines the expanded material, which, once it has cooled off to
ambient temperature, shows up as a ramp off the end of the workpiece. It is
important not to confuse such a ramp with deflection in the system.

– Taper at one end of the workpiece signifies a thermal problem, whereas a

taper at both ends of the cut indicates mechanical deflection.
Coolant System – Nozzle Design
• As a rule of thumb, the coolant flow rate should be 2 or 3 gallons per
minute, per main spindle horsepower
– Actual coolant capacity required will depend upon the portion of the
machine’s horsepower actually used
• Typical flow rates are in the range of 40-125 US g.p.m
• Nozzle pressure of 80 to 100 p.s.i. for wheel surface speeds of 4000-
7000 s.f.p.m
• A 20 h.p. machine would require a minimum coolant flow of
40-60 gallons per minute
• Coolant velocity must be the same or greater than the wheel velocity
• In order to penetrate the air envelope around the wheel
• To take advantage of the porous structure of the grinding wheel to deliver
the coolant to the arc of contact
Coolant System – Nozzle Design

Norton Abrasives App

Coolant System – Nozzle Design

Calculating Nozzles
Given: 1 Gal = 231 in3
Given pump delivery in Gal/Min: Find in3/second

231 in3 X 50 Gal X 1Min = 192.5 in3

Gal Min 60Sec Sec
Coolant System – Nozzle Design

Given wheel speed in surface feet/minute: Find in/sec

5500 ft X 12 in X 1Min = 1100 in

Min Ft 60Sec Sec
Coolant System – Nozzle Design

W = 1 inch
X = 0.175”

W
Coolant System – Nozzle Design

Given wheel width: Find height of nozzle

192.5 in3
1100 in = Sec .
Sec (Width) (Height)
Coolant System – Nozzle Design

Given wheel width: Find height of nozzle (Continued)

192.5 in3
1100 in = Sec .
Sec (1 in) (X)

192.5 in3
X = Sec = 0.175 in
(1100 in) (1 inch)
( Sec )
Coolant System – Nozzle Design
When calculated nozzle size is determined, design the end of the
nozzle with a ½” long straight portion to get a smooth, laminar flow of
coolant without fanning or turbulence.

½”

6” Min.
This distance is required to
straighten coolant flow and
minimize turbulence created
by plumbing elbows.
Wheel Selection

• Abrasive Type
• Grit Size
• Grade
• Structure
• Bond
 Wheel Selection

Porosity

Bond

Grain
Wheel Selection

• Abrasive type is based on

– Workpiece material properties
– Desired MRR
Abrasive GRIT SIZE

• Coarser grains
– Higher stock-removal rates
– Softer Materials
– Large Contact Area
– Rougher Surface Finish
– Large Minimum Radius
• Finer grains
– High-precision grinding
– Harder Materials
– Small Contact Area
– Finer Finish
– Small Minimum Radius
Wheel Selection-Grade

• Higher graded wheels

– More bond and less porosity, making them ‘act harder’
– Maintain form better
– Prone to burning because the grits are not released upon dulling

• Lower graded wheels

– Have less bond and more porosity, making them act ‘softer’
– Tend to loose form but are less prone to burning because the grits release
upon dulling, maintaining a ‘self-sharpening’ or ‘free-cutting’ wheel
Wheel Selection
Wheel Selection-Grade

• Creepfeed grinding with its longer length of arc of contact tends to

use softer-graded wheels because of the larger surface area available
to distribute the forces on the grits.

• The optimum wheel needs to strike a balance between strength and

sharpness: it should be hard enough to maintain form but soft enough
to release dull grits.
Wheel Selection

Structure – The structure indicates the spacing of the abrasive

within the wheel. A smaller number indicates a higher percentage
of abrasive and a more closed structure. A larger number
indicates a lower percentage of abrasive and a more open
structure. A more open structure facilitates chip formation.

Bond – The purpose of the bond is to hold the abrasive grits in

place. Vitrified bonded wheels are the most common and are
used with both conventional and superabrasives. They are stiff
(good for precision grinding), have a porous structure and are not
sensitive to high temperatures.
Wheel Selection - Titanium Aluminide

• Grinding Gamma Titanium Aluminide

– Light Weight Ti Alloy
– High Strength and Temperature capabilities
– Extremely difficult to grind
• Brittle
– Chipping and cracking can occur
– Sharp edges and grain pull out
• Low Thermal Conductivity
• Highly Abrasive
Grinding Performance on γ-TiAl with SiC

Metal
adhesion

Work piece
Cracking
observed

Due to metal adhesion shown above on the active grains of

SiC, excessive dressing is required to eliminate or reduce
thermal damage on material
Wheel Selection - Titanium Aluminide

• Paradigm Technology
– Shares porosity properties of Vitrified
– Shares dressing properties of Vitrified
– Shares toughness of metal bonds
– Has extreme specification flexibility
• Abrasive type, concentration, filler and metallurgy
– Easy to Profile
– 100% Metal bond best suited for “pulling” heat fro Heat sensitive materials
• SiC New Technology
Grinding Performance on γ-TiAl with Paradigm

Paradigm Diamond

No metal adhesion was visible grinding this material with

Diamond Paradigm. As a result, grinding power was stable
and no thermal damage was present!
Grinding Performance on γ-TiAl with Paradigm

The black progression plot

represents the grinding
performance for Paradigm
and the red plot represents
grinding performance for
Direct Plated. As shown,
although DP shows slightly
less power draw over time,
DP tends to be un-
predictable in life and
performance creating a less
robust process than having a
high performing dressable
metal bond.
Grinding with Paradigm – Economics
Usable abr depth (in) 0.5 1.5
# equivliment 8"x 0.5" x 1
3
wheels per roll (Paradigm only)
specific stock removed per dress
0.81 0.145 SIC is 4 Dresses per part
(in3/in)
Dress depth per part (in) 0.0004 0.0058
Dress cycles per wheel 1250 259
specific stock removed per
1013 38
wheel (in3/in)

specific stock removed per roll

3038
(in3/in)

Stock removed per part (in3/in) 0.58 0.58

Roots per dress 1.0 0.25
Roots per wheel 1250 65
Roots per roll 3750 11250 SIC Roll life estimated @ 3X
Wheel cost (USD) $ 1,200.00 $ 150.00
Roll Cost (USD) $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00
Labor & Overhead (USD/hr) $ 125.00 $ 125.00

Wheel Cost per root $ 0.96 $ 2.32

Roll Cost per root $ 0.80 $ 0.27
Total Abr. Cost per root $ 1.76 $ 2.59

L&O cost per root (USD) $ 3.13 $ 5.21

Total Cost Per Part (USD) $ 4.89 $ 7.80

Paradigm Diamond Conventional SiC
Wheel Selection - Titanium Aluminide
Wheel Selection - Titanium Aluminide
Wheel Selection - Titanium Aluminide
Dressing

- Roll Direction
- Roll Ratio
- C.D.
- N.C.D. & N.C.D. Dress Infeed Rate
Dressing – Roll Direction

Unidirectional: Wheel and roll spinning in the same direction at

the point of contact:
• Creates a more aggressive (Open) wheel face
• Permits a higher Metal Removal Rate during grinding
• Expect rougher surface finish
• Creates lower grinding wheel
forces
Dressing – Roll Direction
Counterdirectional: Wheel and roll rotating in opposite directions
at point of contact.
• Less aggressive (Closed) wheel face

• Lower material removal rate

• Expect finer surface finishes
• Requires higher grinding wheel forces
• This rotation maximizes life in CDP rolls
• Not recommended for Creepfeed grinding
or initial form dressing of CF wheels
Dressing – Roll Ratio

Determining the correct speed ratio (Roll RPM):

• Typical applications using Aluminum oxide, Seeded Gel (SG) and
Targa (TG) requires a roll speed of 30% to 50% of the wheel S.F.P.M.

• Creepfeed applications require a roll speed of 60% to 95% of the wheel

S.F.P.M. and in some cases above the 1:1 ratio.

• CBN wheels in I.D. grinding applications 20% to 50% of the wheel

S.F.P.M. In O.D grinding applications 50% to 80% of the wheel
S.F.P.M.
Dressing – Roll Ratio
Dressing – Roll Ratio

Effect of speed ratio (Vdia/Vwheel), depth of dress,

and speed direction on the wheel surface roughness
following rotary form roll dressing.
Dressing – Dwell Effect

Effect of dwell, depth of dress, and speed direction on the wheel

surface roughness following rotary form roll dressing. (note: a 3”(76mm)
wheel at 9500 SFM (48 m/s) requires only 0.4 sec. to rotate 80 revolutions!)
Dressing – C.D.

In-feed rates of .000010”-.000060” on the radius per wheel revolution is

within the normal range however rates as low as .000001”/rev and as
high as .000080”/rev though uncommon have merit in some
applications.
Continuous Dress Creepfeed Grinding (CDCF
or CD)
• Average radial wheel wear =
• ((CD amount)*((SFPM*12)/(PI()*(Start Dia-(start dia –stub dia)/2)))*(Grind
length + security length))/Feed rate
– Units of CD are in/rev.
– Feed rate is in in/min
– Dia is in in
• Take DOC into account for calculating over travel if the machine
compensates that based on stub diameter.
• Since SFPM stays constant and diameter changes, wheel RPM will
increase over the life of the wheel. On the machine controller screen, you
should see that wheel wear increases per cycle as the diameter decreases.
• The reason that the wheel breaks down more as the diameter decreases is
due to the fact that there is less abrasive packed in the wheel. Hence,
pressure per unit grain increases and the wheel tends to break down more.
Dressing – N.C.D.

• Typical in-feed amounts range between .0004-.0015” on the radius

per increment.
• Once the dress amount has been established for a N.C.D. application
the most overlooked parameter is the dress infeed rate.
• Slower rates will close up the wheel face while faster infeed rates will
open up the wheel face.
• Burn problems relating to dress parameters are often ‘fixed’ by
increasing the dress amount when in fact the problem relates more to
the dress infeed rate.
Grinding Parameters

- Wheel Speed
- Constant S.F.P.M. (effects of wheel diameter and arc of contact)
- Workpiece Feed (“X” Axis)
- Depth Of Cut (number of passes)
- Roll Ratio
- Dressing
Grinding Parameters – Wheel Speed
Vc
Increasing the wheel speed
• per unit of time more cutting edges
engaged
• smaller chips
• lower load on individual grain
• decreased friability of grain
» the grinding wheel acts ?????
Vc
Decreasing the wheel speed
• per unit of time fewer cutting edges
engaged
• bigger chips
• higher load on individual grain
• increased friability of grain
» the grinding wheel acts ?????
Grinding Parameters – Wheel Speed
Vc
Increasing the wheel speed
• per unit of time more cutting edges
engaged
• smaller chips
• lower load on individual grain
• decreased friability of grain
» the grinding wheel acts harder
Vc
Decreasing the wheel speed
• per unit of time fewer cutting edges
engaged
• bigger chips
• higher load on individual grain
• increased friability of grain
» the grinding wheel acts softer
Grinding Parameters – Wheel Diameter
Ak
Increasing the wheel diameter
• increased contact area between wheel and
workpiece
• grinding forces remain practically constant
• lower load on individual grain
• decreased friability of grain
» the grinding wheel acts ??????
Ak
Decreasing the wheel diameter
• decreased contact area between wheel and
workpiece
• grinding forces remain practically constant
• higher load on individual grain
• increased friability of grain
» the grinding wheel acts ??????
Grinding Parameters – Wheel Diameter
Ak
Increasing the wheel diameter
• increased contact area between wheel and
workpiece
• grinding forces remain practically constant
• lower load on individual grain
• decreased friability of grain
» the grinding wheel acts harder
Ak
Decreasing the wheel diameter
• decreased contact area between wheel and
workpiece
• grinding forces remain practically constant
• higher load on individual grain
• increased friability of grain
» the grinding wheel acts softer
Grinding Parameters – Workpiece Feed

Vw Vw

Increasing the feed rate Decreasing the feed rate

• increased material removal rate • reduced material removal rate
• bigger chips • smaller chips
• higher load on individual grain • lower load on individual grain
•Increased friability of grain • decreased friability of grain

» the grinding wheel acts ?????? » the grinding wheel acts ??????
Grinding Parameters – Workpiece Feed

Vw Vw

Increasing the feed rate Decreasing the feed rate

• increased material removal rate • reduced material removal rate
• bigger chips • smaller chips
• higher load on individual grain • lower load on individual grain
•Increased friability of grain • decreased friability of grain

» the grinding wheel acts softer » the grinding wheel acts harder
Grinding Parameters – Depth of Cut

ae
ae

Increasing the depth of cut Decreasing the depth of cut

• increased material removal rate • reduced material removal rate

• bigger chips • smaller chips

• higher load on individual grain • lower load on individual grain

• increased friability of grain • decreased friability of grain

» the grinding wheel acts ?????? » the grinding wheel acts ??????
Grinding Parameters – Depth of Cut

ae
ae

Increasing the depth of cut Decreasing the depth of cut

• increased material removal rate • reduced material removal rate

• bigger chips • smaller chips

• higher load on individual grain • lower load on individual grain

• increased friability of grain • decreased friability of grain

» the grinding wheel acts softer » the grinding wheel acts harder
Understanding the Outputs
(Discussion Slide)

- MRR, MRR’
- G-Ratio
- Flatness
- Surface Finish
- Cycle Time
- Cutting Power
- Cost To Produce Component
Bibliography

•Practical Creepfeed Grinding. J.R. Besse. SME MR87-820, 1987.

•Further Developments In Creepfeed Grinding. J.R. Besse. SME MS89-751, 1989.
•Internal Saint-Gobain Reports. J.R. Besse. 1984-1990.
•Internal Saint-Gobain Reports. W.D. James. 1998.
•Internal Saint-Gobain Reports. C. Arcona. 2003.
•Internal Saint-Gobain Reports. T.M.J. Llewellyn 1998-2005.
•Handbook of Modern Grinding Technology. Chapter 2. Principles of Grinding. R.P.
Lindsay. New York: Chapman and Hall, 1982.
•Creepfeed Surface Grinding. S.C. Salmon. PhD Thesis, University of Bristol, 1979
•Erasteel Education The Grinding Doc. Dr. Jeffery Badger. 2004