0附錄：外文資料和中文翻譯外文資料：Testing of Tool Life CostMachining cost is the sum of the machine tool cost and the cutter cost. The machine cost consists of idle cost, machining cost, and tool changing cost. The machining cost decreases with increased cutting speed; while the idle cost remains constant with changes in cutting speed. From the machining data handbook [24] the generalized machining cost equation is listed below:?? 13.)1(82.3.82.3 321 ?????????????????? pCbPrrdir GtKtvTfDLvfttRvfeLDMCIn order to optimize the cutting condition, it is essential to determine the mathematical relationship between the cuttings inserts type and cutting speed. In our study Taylor's model will be used in relating the cutting tool life to the cutting speed:VT“ =C V= cutting speedT= Cutting time to produce a standard amount of flank wear (e.g. 0.2mm) n and C are constants for the material or conditions used.In order to determine constants `n' and `C' for the cutting inserts under study in machining 4140 steel and the conditions used in the experiments, a 1LogV against LogT is drawn and shown for the three types of cutting inserts under study Figure 1, Figure 2are for KC313 under dry and wet conditions, Figure 3, and Figure 4are for KC732. In addition, Figure 6, and Figure 7are for KC5010. It can be seen from the aforementioned figures that in-spite of considerable scatter in test measurements, the results fall reasonably well on a straight line. From the curves it can be seen that for the same cutting speed the tool life increases by increasing the wear criterion and introduction of coolant emulsion for KC313 and KC732. However, as seen in KC5010 tool life increases by increasing the wear criterion and decreases by introducing coolant. This negative behavior of KC5010 toward coolant emulsion and the effect of wear mechanisms behind it will be covered in Chapter 5. As well as the wear kinds on other inserts investigated in this research.Metal cutting studies focused on tools' wear, tool life, and wear mechanisms. However, future research should pay more attention to other factors as well:? Wear criterion value set up by the factory system, which basically the tool wear threshold value that suits the factory product.? Types of tools used, such as carbide tips and high speed tools. Studying the variation of tool life wear under dry and wet cutting that effect the tool life equation constants (C,n) is useful. This will improve tool life because it also affects the economy of cutting [24].2In order to determine the effect of cutting fluid on the selected wear criterion, relationship between different wear criteria and machining cost for the cutting inserts under HSM must be studied. The value of the tool life constants (C,n) for different wear criteria are extracted and plotted within the ranges listed in table (1). The values of the constants (C, n) extracted from Figure 1/B, Figure 3IB, and Figure 3-10 are shown in tables1 and 2. Further explanation of the relationship between these parameters and wear criteria will be covered through out the next figures. Figure5represents the relationship between `n' and wear criterion. As wear criterion increase `n'.3(a) Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (dry condition).(b) Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (wet condition)Figure 2Time versus speed at different wear criteria KC313. (a) Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteri(drycondition). (b) Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (wet condition).4(a)Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (dry condition)(b) Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (wet condition).Figure 3Time versus speed at different wear criteria KC732 (a)Log (time) versus Log(speed) at different wear criteria (dry condition), (b) Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (wet condition)(a)Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (dry condition).5(b)Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (wet condition)Figure 3-10 Time versus speed at different wear criteria KC5010 (a) Log (time) versus Log(speed) at different wear criteria (dry condition), (b) Log (time) versus Log (speed) at different wear criteria (wet condition).Table 1 Ranges of plotted tool life constants.Range Cutting Insert Condition0 LogT 2.6 KC313 Dry0 Log T 4.1 KC313 Wet0 LogT 2.6 KC5010 Dry0 Log T 1.75 KC5010 Wet60 LogT 2.1 KC732 Dry0 Log T 2.4 KC732 WetTable 2 Wear Criteria versus `C' and `n' for three cutting inserts (Dry Condition).KC 313 KC 5010 KC732WearCriteria(mm)C n C n C nconstant constant constant constant constant constant0.15 142 0.260 518 0.248 630 0.2880.2 165 0.212 560 0.264 964 0.3640.25 196 0.240 596 0.278 1099 0.3710.3 238 0.293 605 0.279 1233 0.3930.35 250 0.275 612 0.279 1399 0.4210.4 263 0.281 625 0.281 1503 0.4340.45 282 0.292 625 0.278 1517 0.4340.5 292 0.294 630 0.276 1577 0.4420.55 302 0.296 632 0.274 1592 0.4430.6 313 0.300 638 0.274 1611 0.444Table 3Wear Criteria versus `C' and `n' for three cutting inserts (Wet Condition).7KC 313 KC 5010 KC732Wear criterion(mm)C n C n C n0.15 167 0.201 497 0.298 881.050 0.3320.2 187 0.210 619 0.310 1051.96 0.3530.25 228 0.240 610 0.312 1297.18 0.39300.3 244 0.250 628 0.309 1545.25 0.42400.35 267 0.260 626 0.300 1782.38 0.45400.4 291 0.280 619 0.290 1918.67 0.46800.45 338 0.310 615 0.282 2137.96 0.49100.5 303 0.310 616 0.279 ` 2477.42 0.52400.55 397 0.340 618 0.278 2837.92 0.55400.6 422 0.350 626 0.279 3243.39 0.5830values increase for both cutting conditions. In addition, `n' values for wet condition is lower than dry conditions up until wear criterion 0.38 after which `n' for wet starts to get bigger. Figure 5 shows `C' values versus wear criterion, and reveals `C' increases as the wear criterion increases for both dry and wet cutting. However, `C' values under wet condition are getting higher than under dry conditions. This proves the increase in tool life by introducing coolant emulsion and by increasing the wear criterion for this cutting tool material during cutting.8Next, Figure 6represents values of `n' with respect to wear criterion for KC732 material under dry and wet conditions. As the wear criteria increase `n' values increase. Furthermore, wear curve is higher than dry curve. Figure7 presents a proportional relationship between constant `C' values and wear criterion. However, wet `C' curve is higher than dry curves, which indicates the benefit of using coolant emulsion for material KC732. This benefit becomes more essential by increasing the wear criterion. The higher the `C' value; the higher the tool life becomes. Figure8shows the effect of introducing coolant emulsion on cutting tool performance. Therefore, the higher `n'; the lower the tool life is. Figure9shows the drop in `C' values by increasing the wear criterion and coolant usage; thus indicating a shorter tool life in wet cutting condition. During the previous curves of KC313 and KC732 materials, the increase in `n' values was an indication off shortened tool life. However, the huge increase in wet `C' curves over dry `C' over compensated the drop and elongated tool life for KC313 and KC732. In contrast, the case is for KC5010. Figure 12 and Figure 10 are for uncoated cemented carbide (KC313). It shows the relationship between cost cutting speeds for different wear criteria under dry and wet cutting.9(a) n values versus wear criterion (wet and dry).(b) C values versus wear criterion (wet and dry).Figure 11Taylor's constants for KC313 versus wear criteria,(a) n values versus wear criteria (wet and dry), (b) C values versus wear criteria (wet and dry).10(a) n values versus wear criterion (wet and dry).(b) C values versus wear criterion (wet and dry).Figure 12Taylor's constants for KC732 versus wear criteria, (a) n values versus wear criteria (wet and dry), (b) C values versus wear criteria (wet and dry).11(a)n values versus wear criterion (wet and dry).(b)C values versus wear criterion (wet and dry)Figure 13 Taylor's constants for KC5010 versus wear criteria, (a) n values versus wear criteria (wet and dry), (b) C values versus wear criteria (wet and dry).12Both conditions indicate as the wear criteria increases the machining cost decreases. Nonetheless, as the speed increases the cost reaches optimum value and then increases. Figure 14 and Figure 3-15B show economical comparison between dry and wet cutting at (0.4 and 0.6 mm) wear criterion. Optimum cutting speed for dry cutting is 90 m/min while 120 m/min is for wet cutting.Cost as a function of speed is presented in Figure15 and Figure 16 for sandwich coating (KC732) under dry and wet conditions. Again, as wear criteria increases, cost decreases. Furthermore, the optimum speed of 260 m/min of dry cutting, increased to 360 m/min in cases of wet cutting. This indicates the importance of coolant with this material not only decreases cost but also increases productivity.Figure 3-17A and Figure 17 summarize the relationship of cost and speed for coated tools with TiALN (KC5010) under dry and wet cutting conditions. As the cutting speed increases the cost increases and as the wear criteria increases the cost decreases. The optimum cost was at the lowest speed (210 m/min) in both machining conditions.A cost comparison between KC732 and KC5010 at different wear criteria and machining conditions is presented in Figures 18 and19. It can be seen that KC732 responded positively to coolant in terms of extended tool life, and increased the optimum cutting speed from 260m/min to 360 nn/min. Nonetheless, coolant introduction to KC5010 at high speed cutting lowered the tool life and increased machining cost. The data presented in the 13aforementioned figures shows that dry cutting is more cost effective than wet cutting within speed range of 210 m/min-310 m/min for KC732 and vise versa at any speed higher than 310m/min. Cutting tool material KC5010 is cost effective at dry and 210 m/min. Therefore, in spite of the cost of the KC732; it is proven to be superior over KC313 (uncoated) and KC5010 in wear cost. Table 3 summarizes the optimum values of cost and speed under wet and dry cutting.Figures18, and 17for KC313 (uncoated) show the relationship between costs and wear criterion at different cutting speeds under dry and wet conditions. Figure 20, and Figure 21 are plotted for KC732 presenting cutting cost as a function of wear criteria for dry and wet conditions. Figure 3-21A and Figure 3-21B are plotted for KC5010. The curves show that for the same cutting velocity, by increases the selected wear criterion, the cost decreases.The improved performance of (KC313) under wet over dry cutting in terms off tool life is presented in Figure 22. The results of the two coatings testing methods, of flank wear for the KC732 and KC5010 are shown in Figure 23. Clearly this indicates improvement in cutting inserts' life with TiN-TiCN-TiN coatings (KC732) under wet over dry cutting, and reduction in tool life of TiALN coating (KC5010) on wet cutting. Finally, KC732 provides superior performance under all cutting conditions over KC5010.14(a)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry ).15(b)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).Figure 23 Cost variation with speed for KC313, (a) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry), (b) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).(a)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at 0.4mm wear criterion.16(b)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at 0.6mm wear criterionFigure 24 Cost versus speed comparison at wet and dry at two values of wear Criterion: (a) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at 0.4mm wear Criterion, (b) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at 0.6mm wear criterion.17(a)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry ).(b)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).Figure 25 Cost variation with speed for KC732, (a) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry), (b) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).18(a)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry ).(b)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).19Figure 26 Cost variation with speed for KC732, (a) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry), (b) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).(a)Cost versus speed at 0.4 mm wear criterion20(b)Cost versus speed at 0.6 mm wear criterionFigure 27 Cost comparison between KC5010 and KC732 at different wear criteria (a) Cost versus speed at 0.4 mm wear criterion, (b) Cost versus speed at 0.6 mm wear criterion.Table4 Comparison between three cutting inserts at the same wear criterion Optimum [Cost/ SpeedTool Type Wear criterion(mm) (m/min)]Dry WetKC313 0.6 47$ / 90 40$/90KC5010 0.6 34$ / 210 36$/210KC732 0.6 29$ / 260 28.84$/36021(a)The variation of cost versus wear criterion at different cutting speeds (dry ).(b)The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).22Figure 26 Cost variation with wear criteria for KC313, (a): The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry), (b): The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).（a）The variation of cost versus wear criterion at different cutting speeds (dry )23(b)The variation of cost versus wear criterion at different cutting speeds (wet).Figure 3-20 Cost variation with wear criteria for KC732, (a): The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry), (b): The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet).24(a)The variation of cost versus wear criterion at different cutting speeds (dry ).(b)The variation of cost versus wear criterion at different cutting speeds (wet).Figure 3-21 Cost variation with wear criteria for KC5010, (a) The variation 25of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (dry), (b) The variation of cost versus cutting speed at different wear criteria (wet)(a)Tool life at 0.4 mm wear criterion for KC313 (dry & wet).(b)Tool life at 0.4 mm wear criterion of KC732 and KC5010 (dry &wet).26Figure 3-22 Tool life comparison at 0.4 wear criterion under dry and wet(a) Tool life at 0.4 mm wear criterion for KC313 (dry & wet), (b) Tool life at 0.4 mm wear criterion of KC732 and KC5010 (dry &wet).The cutting inserts were retested at cutting speed values within the range of experimental testing speeds under dry and wet machining condition. The results presented are for the cemented carbide uncoated (KC313), cemented carbide coated with TiALN (KC5010), and for the KC732. Figures 3-23A and 3-23B show the theoretical and experimental results of machining KC313 at a cutting speed of 100 m/min, and 160 m/min respectively. A good agreement between theoretical and experimental values was noticed indicating the accuracy of Taylor's formula in predicting the tool life. Figures 3-24A and 3-24B present theoretical and experimental results of machining KC5010, at two different cutting speeds 280 m/min and 390 m/min good agreement between both was noticed. Experimental and theoretical data for the KC732 are presented in Figures 3-25A, and 3-25B under 280m/min and 390m/min. In this section result samples were presented and the rest of figures are included in the appendix.27(a)Theoretical and experimental results of machining KC313 at 100m/min.(b)Theoretical and experimental results of machining KC313 at 160m/min.Figure 3-23 Theoretical and experimental results for KC313 under wet and dry cutting at different speeds: (a) Theoretical and experimental results of 28machining KC313 at 100m/min, (b) Theoretical and experimental results of machining KC313 at 160m/min.(a)Theoretical and experimental results of machining KC5010 at 280m/min.(b)Theoretical and experimental results of machining KC5010 at 390m/min.29Figure 3-24 Theoretical and experimental results for KC5010 under wet and dry cutting at different speeds: (a) Theoretical and experimental results of machining KC5010 at 280m/min, (b) Theoretical and experimental results of machining KC5010 at 390m/min.(a)Theoretical and experimental results of machining KC732 at 280m/min.