Reliability-based Interval Optimization for the Disc-Mill Cutter Machining TC17 Blisk-Tunnel

doi:10.23940/ijpe.19.01.p4.3544

Abstract

Abstract:

In the paper, the sensitivity of the processing parameters for the cutting force on the disc-mill cutter machining TC17 blisk-tunnel is studied. Firstly, based on response surface methodology (RSM), a quadratic regression model between the cutting force and the processing parameters (cutting speed, feed rate per tooth, and cutting height) was established. Then, the local sensitivity of each parameter for thecutting force was calculated using the regression model, and a sensitivity curve of single parameter was acquired. Stable and unstable regions of each parameter were obtained byanalyzing the sensitivity curve. Finalglobal sensitivity of the process parameterstothe cutting force was computed using theSobol index method. The main effect, total effect, and interactive effect indexes were acquired. The results suggested that the cutting force for the disc-mill cutter machining blisk-tunnel is sensitive to thecutting speed and the feed rate per tooth.There existsa remarkable interaction between thecutting speed, feed rate per tooth, and cutting height on the cutting force. The cutting speed with [30,50], feed rate per tooth with [0.02,0.065],and cutting height with [28,43] are stable regions for the cutting force.

Key words: disc-mill cutter, cutting force, process parameters, local sensitivity analysis, global sensitivity analysis

Nan Zhang, Guangjun Jiang, and Jie Zhou. Reliability-based Interval Optimization for the Disc-Mill Cutter Machining TC17 Blisk-Tunnel [J]. Int J Performability Eng, 2019, 15(1): 35-44.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

Figures/Tables 16

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

References 20

[1]	P.B. Zhao and Y. Shi , “Robust Control of the A-Axis with Friction Variation and Parameters Uncertainty in Five-Axis CNC Machine Tools,” Archive Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 1989-1996, Vol. 228, No. 14, pp. 2545-2556, September 2014
[2]	P. B. Zhao, Y. Shi, J. Huang , “Proportional-Integral based Fuzzy Sliding Mode Control of the MillingHead,” Control Engineering Practice, Vol.3, No. 5, pp.1-13, August 2016 doi: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2016.04.012
[3]	T. Thepsonthi and T. Özel ,“Multi-Objective Process Optimization for Micro-End Milling of Ti-6Al-4V Titanium Alloy,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,Vol.63, No. 12, pp. 903-914, December 2012 doi: 10.1007/s00170-012-3980-z
[4]	P.A. Dearnleyand A. N. Grearson , “Evaluation of Principal Wear Mechanisms of Cemented Carbides and Ceramics used for Machining Titanium Alloy IMI 318,” Metal Science Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 47-58, July 2013 doi: 10.1179/mst.1986.2.1.47
[5]	J. Ren, J. Zhou, J. Zeng , “Analysis and Optimization of Cutter Geometric Parameters for Surface Integrity in Milling Titanium Alloy Using a Modified Grey-Taguchi Method,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Vol. 230, No. 11, pp. 2114-2128, September 2015
[6]	S.A. Abbasi and P. Feng , “Evaluating the Effect of PCD and TiAIN Coated Carbide End Mill’s Rake Angle on Machinability of Titanium Alloy TÃ-6AI-4V,” Advanced Materials Research, Vol. 1025-1026, pp. 564, September 2014 doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1025-1026.564
[7]	R. A. R. Rashid, S. Palanisamy, S. Sun, and M. S. Dargusch , “Tool Wear Mechanisms Involved in Crater Formation on Uncoated Carbide Tool When Machining Ti6al4v Allo,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 83, No. 9, pp. 1457-1465, April 2016 doi: 10.1007/s00170-015-7668-z
[8]	M.A. Vazquez-Cruz, R. Guzman-Cruz, I.L. Lopez-Cruz,O. Cornejo-Perez, I. Torres-Pacheco,and R. G. Guevara-Gonzalez , “Global Sensitivity Analysis by Means ofEfast and Sobol’Methods and Calibration of Reduced State-variable Tomgro Model Using Genetic Algorithms,” Computers and Electronics in Agriculture,Vol. 100, pp. 1-12, January 2014 doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2013.10.006
[9]	E. Castillo, A. S. Hadi, A. Conejo, and A. Fernández-Canteli , “A General Method for Local Sensitivity Analysis with Application to Regression Models and Other Optimization Problems,” Technometrics, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 430-444,November 2004 doi: 10.1198/004017004000000509
[10]	A. Saltelli and S. Tarantola ,“A Quantitative Model-Independent Method for Global Sensitivity Analysis of Model Output,” Technometrics, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 39-56, 1999 doi: 10.1080/00401706.1999.10485594
[11]	B. Sudret , “Global Sensitivity Analysis Using Polynomial Chaos Expansions,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 93, No. 7, pp. 964-979, July 2008 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2007.04.002
[12]	G.Li, H. Rabitz, P. E. Yelvington, O. O. Oluwole, F. Bacon, C. E. Kolb , “Global Sensitivity Analysis for Systems with Independent and/orCorrelated Inputs,” Journal of Physical Chemistry, Vol. 2, No. 6, pp. 7587-7589, May 2010 doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.05.131 pmid: 20420436
[13]	V. Tahmasbi, M. Ghoreishi, M. Zolfaghari , “Sensitivity Analysis of Temperature and Force in Robotic Bone Drilling Process Using Sobol Statistical Method,” Biotechnology and Biotechnological Equipment, Vol. 9, pp. 1-12, November 2017 doi: 10.1080/13102818.2017.1403863
[14]	G.Verbeke, G. Molenberghs, H. Thijs, E. Lesaffre, M. G. Kenward , “Sensitivity Analysis for Nonrandom Dropout: A Local Influence Approach,” Biometrics, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 1-7, March 2001
[15]	C.Z. Li and S. Mahadevan , “An Efficient Modularized Sample-based Method to Estimate the First-Order Sobol’ Index,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 153, pp. 110-121, September 2016 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2016.04.012
[16]	F. Pianosi, K. Beven, J. E.Freer, J. W.Hall, J. Rougier, D. B.Stephenson , et al., “Sensitivity Analysis of Environmental Models:A Systematic Review with Practical Workflow,” Environmental Modelling and Software, Vol.79, No. C, pp. 214-232, May 2016 doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.02.008
[17]	R. Rosolem, H. V. Gupta, W. J. Shuttleworth, X. Zeng , “A Fully Multiple‐Criteria Implementation of the Sobol’Method for Parameter Sensitivity Analysis,” Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, Vol. 117, No. D7, pp. 287-298, April 2015 doi: 10.1029/2011JD016355
[18]	M. J. Anderson and P. J. Whitcomb. , “ RsmSimplified: Optimizing Processes Using Response Surface Methods for Design of Experiments Second Edition,”Crc Press, 2016
[19]	T. Yu, Y. Shi, X. He, C. Kang, B. Deng, S. Song , “Optimization of Parameter Ranges for Composite Tape Winding Process based on Sensitivity Analysis,” Applied Composite Materials, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp. 1-16, August 2016 doi: 10.1007/s10443-016-9553-9
[20]	B. Zhou, L. Wang, Y. Liu, Y. Hu, , “Analysis of Factor Sensitivity in Brake Friction and Wear Performance based on the Sobol Method,” Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 40, No. 7, pp. 345,July 2018 doi: 10.1007/s40430-018-1269-3

Level	$v$(m/min)	${{f}_{c}}$(mm/tooth)	${{a}_{w}}$(mm)
1	30	0.020	28
2	40	0.035	33
3	50	0.050	38
4	60	0.065	43
5	70	0.080	48

Al	Sn	Zr
4.5%-5.5%	1.6%-2.4%	1.6%-2.4%
Mo	Cr	Ti
3.5%-4.5%	3.5%-4.5%	Balance

Process parameters	Stableregion	Unstable region
$v$	$\left[ 30,50 \right]$	$\left[ 50,70 \right]$
${{f}_{c}}$	$\left[ 0.02,0.065 \right]$	$\left[ 0.065,0.08 \right]$
${{a}_{w}}$	$\left[ 28,43 \right]$	$\left[ 43,48 \right]$.

No.	${{y}_{1}}$	${{y}_{2}}$	${{y}_{3}}$	${F}'$.
1	0	0	0	0.0000
2	0	0.25	0.25	0.0879
3	0	0.5	0.5	0.2609
4	0	0.75	0.75	0.4209
5	0	1	1	0.6283
6	0.25	0	0.25	0.0171
7	0.25	0.25	0.5	0.1298
8	0.25	0.5	0.75	0.2842
9	0.25	0.75	1	0.4557
10	0.25	1	0	0.6822
11	0.5	0	0.5	0.0579
12	0.5	0.25	0.75	0.1778
13	0.5	0.5	1	0.3060
14	0.5	0.75	0	0.4844
15	0.5	1	0.25	0.7923
16	0.75	0	0.75	0.0834
17	0.75	0.25	1	0.2006
18	0.75	0.5	0	0.3279
19	0.75	0.75	0.25	0.5459
20	0.75	1	0.5	0.8853
21	1	0	1	0.1585
22	1	0.25	0	0.2428
23	1	0.5	0.25	0.3725
24	1	0.75	0.5	0.6453
25	1	1	0.75	1.0000

Process parameters	Main effect${{S}_{{{y}_{i}}}}$	Totaleffect$S_{{{y}_{i}}}^{T}$	Differencevalue
${{y}_{1}}$	0.3258	0.3403	0.0145
${{y}_{2}}$	0.5860	0.6020	0.0160
${{y}_{3}}$	0.0451	0.0510	0.0059