OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 5 4 3 Results and Discussion Comparative Performance: CT and UVAHT First set of twenty experiments as depicted in table 2 are performed to comparatively evaluate the power consumption and flank wear under CT and UVAHT. Experiments were performed varying the cutting speed, feed, and depth of cut and UVAHT experiments were performed using constant frequency and amplitude of vibrations of 20 kHz and 20 µm, respectively. Tool wear is the steady degradation of tool materials which leads the tool to deviate from its original shape during cutting. The wear of tools affects machining efficiency, quality, cutting power, and pricing. Additionally, tool wear has a significant influence on the surface quality of the machined component as well. The three major forms of wear are commonly believed to be abrasion, adhesion and diffusion. A Dino-Lite digital microscope with a magnification rate of up to 250X was used to monitor tool wear. Dino Capture 2.0 recognizes images and stores them in the system memory when installed on a laptop. The digital microscope images of tool wear are given below in varying degrees of detail. As previously defined, conventional turning frequency and amplitude were regarded zero, and in the case of ultrasonic vibrationassisted turning, frequency and amplitude were held constant at 20 kHz and 20 µm, respectively. Power consumption during cutting provides stability and assists in selecting appropriate modes to reduce energy consumption. Power consumption should be reduced throughout the machining process to encourage sustainable development in the machining process. This section describes how machine tools utilize power during CT and UVAHT in various cutting conditions. The power required to operate the lathe machine is calculated as the product of voltage and current. Throughout the experiment, the voltage was kept constant at roughly 420 volts (3-phase), and the current was monitored with a clap meter. The power was estimated by multiplying the voltage and current. The changes in experimentally based tool wear and power consumption in CT and UVAHT are shown in figs. 5 and 6. Fig. 5. Comparison of flank wear in CT and UVAHT Fig. 6. Comparison of power consumption in CT and UVAHT
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk0ODM1