OBRABOTKAMETALLOV technology Vol. 25 No. 1 2023 As it can be seen from Figure 6, despite a significant change in the wear of the cutting wedge along the flank, the stationary components of the response forces to the forming motions have hardly changed. It is also clear from the figure that the relations between these forces do not change either, which clearly contradicts the assumption about the restructuring of response forces. Thus, the first hypothesis put forward at the beginning of the paper cannot be used as an objective for the scientific position put forward by A.D. Makarov. In other words, the combination of factors: the incident characteristic of the cutting force (according to N.N. Zorev) and the minimum coefficient of friction associated with the transition of friction from adhesive to diffusion nature is not sufficient to ensure the optimality of the cutting system according to the statement of A.D. Makarov. First of all, this is due to the lack of adjustment of the force response on the part of the cutting process to the forming motions of the tool with the increase in the wear of the cutting wedge along the flank. Testing the second hypothesis Correction of the mathematical model of the cutting control system Let’s consider the second statement put forward as an objective of the scientific position of A.D. Makarov, it is important to note that it is necessary to supplement the mathematical model describing the response of the cutting system to the forming motions of the tool with an additional element displaying the Fx, kgF Fy, kgF Fz, kgF t, s a) b) c) t, s t, s Fx, kgF Fy, kgF Fz, kgF t, s d) e) f) t, s t, s Fig. 6. Reaction forces for the option with a processing speed of 1,600 rpm: a – Fx for h = 0.22; b – Fy for h = 0.22; c – Fz for h = 0.22; d – Fx for h = 0.49; e – Fy for h = 0.49; f – Fz for h = 0.49 а b c d e f
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk0ODM1