OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 5 1 3 Ta b l e 1 Form factors of compared cutters Parameters Parameter value Construction code О1 О2 О3 О4 О5 О6 Cutting material WC2Co WC8Co WC-15Co WC-3Co WC-2TaC6Co WC-5TiC-10Co Cutter diameter, mm 250 Cutter cost, rubles 4,500 Number of teeth, pcs 4 Number of cutting element switches 50 Cutting width, mm 10 Rake angle, γ° 20 Clearance angle, α° 12 Sharpening time of one cutting element, min 1.5 Cutting mode S = 0.15…0.17 mm/tooth, t = 0.5…0.6 mm, n = 6 000 min–1 Compressive resistance, MPa 3,900 3,910 2,800 4,700 4,900 3,000 Hardness, HRA 91.5 88.0 86.0 91.5 90.5 88.5 Elasticity modulus, GPa 645 598 559 638 632 549 The price of one cutting element, rub. 63 66 54 95 95 45 Let’s consider the production condition, in which it is necessary to provide high operating capacity of the cutting tool and to increase the production efficiency, while reducing production costs. Consequently, the operating capacity and the performancewill have a dimensionless numerical value ij ij a P = , equal to themodulus of the criterion value; and the production costs – a non-dimensional numerical value, equal to the modulus of the reciprocal value of the criterion 1 ij ij a P = . After ranking the criteria, let’s make an incident matrix. 5 1 5 2 5 3 5 4 5 5 5 6 1 1 61.26 16.15 10 23 6.26 1 1 39.29 10.36 10 23 9.76 1 1 22.65 5.97 10 ( ) 23 16.93 1 1 76 20.04 10 23 5.098 1 1 71.67 18.9 10 23 5.41 1 1 34.05 8.98 10 23 12.74 z ij T P R PZ Q Q M a Q Q Q Q − − − − − − ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ = ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ .
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk0ODM1