Vol. 26 No. 4 2024 3 EDITORIAL COUNCIL EDITORIAL BOARD EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Anatoliy A. Bataev, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, Rector, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation DEPUTIES EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Vladimir V. Ivancivsky, D.Sc. (Engineering), Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Machinery Design, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation Vadim Y. Skeeba, Ph.D. (Engineering), Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Machinery Design, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation Editor of the English translation: Elena A. Lozhkina, Ph.D. (Engineering), Department of Material Science in Mechanical Engineering, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation The journal is issued since 1999 Publication frequency – 4 numbers a year Data on the journal are published in «Ulrich's Periodical Directory» Journal “Obrabotka Metallov” (“Metal Working and Material Science”) has been Indexed in Clarivate Analytics Services. Novosibirsk State Technical University, Prospekt K. Marksa, 20, Novosibirsk, 630073, Russia Tel.: +7 (383) 346-17-75 http://journals.nstu.ru/obrabotka_metallov E-mail: metal_working@mail.ru; metal_working@corp.nstu.ru Journal “Obrabotka Metallov – Metal Working and Material Science” is indexed in the world's largest abstracting bibliographic and scientometric databases Web of Science and Scopus. Journal “Obrabotka Metallov” (“Metal Working & Material Science”) has entered into an electronic licensing relationship with EBSCO Publishing, the world's leading aggregator of full text journals, magazines and eBooks. The full text of JOURNAL can be found in the EBSCOhost™ databases.
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 26 No. 4 2024 4 EDITORIAL COUNCIL EDITORIAL COUNCIL CHAIRMAN: Nikolai V. Pustovoy, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, President, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation MEMBERS: The Federative Republic of Brazil: Alberto Moreira Jorge Junior, Dr.-Ing., Full Professor; Federal University of São Carlos, São Carlos The Federal Republic of Germany: Moniko Greif, Dr.-Ing., Professor, Hochschule RheinMain University of Applied Sciences, Russelsheim Florian Nürnberger, Dr.-Ing., Chief Engineer and Head of the Department “Technology of Materials”, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Garbsen; Thomas Hassel, Dr.-Ing., Head of Underwater Technology Center Hanover, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Garbsen The Spain: Andrey L. Chuvilin, Ph.D. (Physics and Mathematics), Ikerbasque Research Professor, Head of Electron Microscopy Laboratory “CIC nanoGUNE”, San Sebastian The Republic of Belarus: Fyodor I. Panteleenko, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, First Vice-Rector, Corresponding Member of National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Belarusian National Technical University, Minsk The Ukraine: Sergiy V. Kovalevskyy, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, Vice Rector for Research and Academic Aff airs, Donbass State Engineering Academy, Kramatorsk The Russian Federation: Vladimir G. Atapin, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk; Victor P. Balkov, Deputy general director, Research and Development Tooling Institute “VNIIINSTRUMENT”, Moscow; Vladimir A. Bataev, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk; Vladimir G. Burov, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk; Aleksandr N. Korotkov, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, Kuzbass State Technical University, Kemerovo; Dmitry V. Lobanov, D.Sc. (Engineering), Associate Professor, I.N. Ulianov Chuvash State University, Cheboksary; Aleksey V. Makarov, D.Sc. (Engineering), Corresponding Member of RAS, Head of division, Head of laboratory (Laboratory of Mechanical Properties) M.N. Miheev Institute of Metal Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences (Ural Branch), Yekaterinburg; Aleksandr G. Ovcharenko, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, Biysk Technological Institute, Biysk; Yuriy N. Saraev, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, V.P. Larionov Institute of the Physical-Technical Problems of the North of the Siberian Branch of the RAS, Yakutsk; Alexander S. Yanyushkin, D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor, I.N. Ulianov Chuvash State University, Cheboksary
Vol. 26 No. 4 2024 5 CONTENTS OBRABOTKAMETALLOV TECHNOLOGY Manikanta J.E., Ambhore N., Shamkuwar S., Gurajala N.K., Dakarapu S.R. Investigation of vegetable-based hybrid nanofl uids on machining performance in MQL turning........................................................................................... 6 Dama Y.B., Jogi B.F., Pawade R., Kulkarni A.P. Impact of print orientation on wear behavior in FDM printed PLA Biomaterial: Study for hip-joint implant...................................................................................................................... 19 GrinenkoA.V., ChumaevskyA.V., Sidorov E.A., Utyaganova V.R.,AmirovA.I., Kolubaev E.A. Geometry distortion, edge oxidation, structural changes and cut surface morphology of 100mm thick sheet product made of aluminum, copper and titanium alloys during reverse polarity plasma cutting...................................................................................... 41 Somatkar A., Dwivedi R., Chinchanikar S. Comparative evaluation of roller burnishing of Al6061-T6 alloy under dry and nanofl uid minimum quantity lubrication conditions............................................................................................... 57 Karlina Yu.I., Konyukhov V.Yu., Oparina T.A. Assessment of the quality and mechanical properties of metal layers from low-carbon steel obtained by the WAAM method with the use of additional using additional mechanical and ultrasonic processing..................................................................................................................................................... 75 EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS Yusubov N.D., Abbasova H.M. Systematics of multi-tool setup on lathe group machines............................................... 92 Toshov J.B., Fozilov D.M., Yelemessov K.K., Ruziev U.N., Abdullayev D.N., Baskanbayeva D.D., Bekirova L.R. Increasing the durability of drill bit teeth by changing its manufacturing technology......................................................... 112 Pospelov I.D. Investigation of the distribution of normal contact stresses in deformation zone during hot rolling of strips made of structural low-alloy steels to increase the resistance of working rolls..................................................... 125 Ablyaz T.R., Blokhin V.B., Shlykov E.S., Muratov K.R., Osinnikov I.V. Manufacturing of tool electrodes with optimized confi guration for copy-piercing electrical discharge machining by rapid prototyping method.......................... 138 MATERIAL SCIENCE Shubert A.V., Konovalov S.V., Panchenko I.A. A review of research on high-entropy alloys, its properties, methods of creation and application.................................................................................................................................................. 153 Syusyuka E.N., Amineva E.H., Kabirov Yu.V., Prutsakova N.V. Analysis of changes in the microstructure of compression rings of an auxiliary marine engine.......................................................................................................... 180 Dudareva A.A., Bushueva E.G., Tyurin A.G., Domarov E.V., Nasennik I.E., Shikalov V.S., Skorokhod K.A., Legkodymov A.A. The eff ect of hot plastic deformation on the structure and properties of surface-modifi ed layers after non-vacuum electron beam surfacing of a powder mixture of composition 10Cr-30B on steel 0.12 C-18 Cr-9 Ni-Ti............................................................................................................................................................................. 192 Boltrushevich A.E., Martyushev N.V., Kozlov V.N., Kuznetsova Yu.S. Structure of Inconel 625 alloy blanks obtained by electric arc surfacing and electron beam surfacing........................................................................................... 206 Sablina T.Y., Panchenko M.Yu., Zyatikov I.A., Puchikin A.V., Konovalov I.N., Panchenko Yu.N. Study of surface hydrophilicity of metallic materials modifi ed by ultraviolet laser radiation........................................................................ 218 EDITORIALMATERIALS 234 FOUNDERS MATERIALS 243 CONTENTS
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 6 4 4 Systematics of multi-tool setup on lathe group machines Nizami Yusubov a, *, Heyran Abbasova b Department of Machine Building, Azerbaijan Technical University, 25 H. Cavid avenue, Baku, AZ1073, Azerbaijan a https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6009-9909, nizami.yusubov@aztu.edu.az; b https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0407-5275, abbasova.heyran@aztu.edu.az Obrabotka metallov - Metal Working and Material Science Journal homepage: http://journals.nstu.ru/obrabotka_metallov Obrabotka metallov (tekhnologiya, oborudovanie, instrumenty) = Metal Working and Material Science. 2024 vol. 26 no. 4 pp. 92–111 ISSN: 1994-6309 (print) / 2541-819X (online) DOI: 10.17212/1994-6309-2024-26.4-92-111 ART I CLE I NFO Article history: Received: 17 July 2024 Revised: 19 August 2024 Accepted: 17 September 2024 Available online: 15 December 2024 Keywords: Systematics of multi-tool setup Lathe group machines Classifi cation formula for setup Parallel multi-tool machining Single-carriage two-coordinate setups Two-carriage two-coordinate setups Funding This work was supported by the Azerbaijan Science Foundation - Grant № АЕF-MGC-2024-2(50)-16/01/1-M-01. ABSTRACT Introduction. The analysis of factory lathe-automatic operations revealed a signifi cant variety of multi-tool setups and identifi ed its areas of application. To develop a matrix theory of accuracy for multi-tool machining and create a unifi ed algorithmic approach to errors modeling for all possible spatial multi-tool setups, it is necessary to consider the fl exibility of the technological system in all coordinate directions. In this regard, it is required to systematize a large number of existing multi-tool setups and classify it to structure the information and improve the understanding of its application. Purpose of the work is to develop a classifi cation of multi-tool setups on multicarriage and multi-spindle CNC lathes, enabling the creation of both a matrix model of machining accuracy for each classifi cation class and a unifi ed generalized matrix model of machining accuracy for the entire classifi cation class. The work investigates the systematics of multi-tool setups, oriented toward the development of matrix models of machining accuracy. Therefore, the classifi cation considered in this work is aimed at identifying the characteristics of force loading and deformation of the technological system during multi-tool machining. The research methods involve identifying the parameters used for classifi cation and the hierarchy of these parameters, which determines the levels and order of the systematics. Based on the principles of systematics of multi-tool setups used in traditional automatic lathes, an analysis of its adaptation to the capabilities of modern lathes designed for multi-tool machining is conducted. Results and discussion. As a result of the research, a formalized six-level classifi cation of multi-tool setups is developed, which includes the following aspects: the method of workpiece mounting, the set of carriages, the types of cutting tools, the types and directions of carriage feeds, the orientation of cutting tools relative to the workpiece, and the method of tool engagement (parallel, sequential). This classifi cation takes into account the technological capabilities for organizing multi-tool machining on modern CNC lathes. The main classes of the proposed systematics of multi-tool setups in the presented work include single-carriage single-coordinate setups, single-carriage two-coordinate setups, dual-carriage single-coordinate setups, dual-carriage two-coordinate setups, and multi-carriage setups. The proposed systematics of multi-tool setups on lathe group machines is aimed at developing machining accuracy models and can serve as a basis for developing recommendations on cutting modes for these CNC machines. The proposed classifi cation of multi-tool setups forms the foundation of the methodological support for the CAD system of lathe-automatic operations and serves as the basis for creating next-generation CAD systems for lathe operations. For citation: Yusubov N.D., Abbasova H.M. Systematics of multi-tool setup on lathe group machines. Obrabotka metallov (tekhnologiya, oborudovanie, instrumenty) = Metal Working and Material Science, 2024, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 92–111. DOI: 10.17212/1994-6309-2024-26.492-111. (In Russian). ______ * Corresponding author Yusubov Nizami D., D.Sc. (Engineering), Professor Azerbaijan Technical University, 25 H. Javid avenue, AZ 1073, Baku, Azerbaijan Tel.: +994 (55) 324 50 12, e-mail: nizami.yusubov@aztu.edu.az Introduction Multi-tool machining is one of the most eff ective means of increasing the productivity of machine operations in machine building industry. [1–10]. It should be noted that the functions of metal-cutting machine tools are constantly expanding to meet the demands for high productivity and precision when machining complex and hard-to-process parts on a single machine [1–6, 11–20]. For example, the paper [2] provides a comprehensive review of multifunctional machines used for metal cutting, its kinematic confi gurations, control technologies, and programming. The paper [8] addresses the issue of optimizing
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Том 23 № 3 2021 EQUIPMEN . INSTRUM TS Vol. 6 No. 4 2024 cutting parameters on multi-position machines and automated lines equipped with multi-spindle heads. In the work [14], turning was performed on a lathe with two cutting tools mounted on the carriage, one in the front and the other in the back. A number of studies [21–34] have addressed specifi c issues related to the problems of designing multi-tool machining or optimizing the process technology. In the work [30], the opportunity of applying various modeling and optimization methods in metal machining processes, classifi ed by several criteria, was critically evaluated. However, none of these studies have examined the need to organize multiple multi-tool setups, or introduced a system for its analysis. In other words, it has not addressed the classifi cation of multi-tool setups and the creation of a unifi ed algorithmic model for machining errors for the entire set of spatial multi-tool setups, taking into account the compliance of the technological system in all coordinate directions. The machining error component that arises due to the elastic displacements of the elements of the technological system under the infl uence of cutting forces, often referred to as the deformation component, is the most controllable during machining and at the design stage. By varying cutting conditions, cutting tool geometry, initial error (at an intermediate stage of machining), and changing the material of the cutting part, it is possible to signifi cantly infl uence the magnitude of machining error [4, 9, 13, 15, 16, 25, 26, 33]. Therefore, the mathematical model of the deformation component of machining error forms the basis of the computational matrix theory of machining accuracy [13, 14, 15, 25, 26, 33, 35, 37]. Attempts to systematize multi-tool setups can be found in the works of A. A. Koshin [35–36]. He introduced four main and one additional classifi cation levels for setups. The main classifi cation criteria are the type of carriage, the type of cutting tool, its orientation (whether it presses the workpiece toward or away from the carriage), and the method of workpiece mounting. The additional criterion is the type of auxiliary device mounted on the main carriage. However, there is no way to describe a number of features specifi c to multi-tool machining on modern CNC (Computer Numerical Control) machines. The formalized systematization of multi-tool setups forms the basis of the methodological support for the Computer-Aided Design (CAD) system of turning-automatic operations [37]. Modern automatic machines, designed for multi-tool machining and equipped with CNC systems, off er signifi cantly richer technological capabilities for organizing multi-tool operations. Therefore, a new, more multifactorial systematization of multi-tool setups, refl ecting these new capabilities, is required. The purpose of the work is to develop a classifi cation of multi-tool setups on multi-carriage and multispindle CNC lathes, enabling the creation of both amatrixmodel ofmachining accuracy for each classifi cation class and a unifi ed generalized matrix model of machining accuracy for the entire classifi cation class. To achieve the set purpose the following tasks are solved: 1. The principles of classifi cation of multi-tool setups are revealed; 2. The main classes of the proposed systematics of multi-tool setups are defi ned. Research methodology Principles for classifying multi-tool setups The basis of systematics is a set of classifi cation indicators. Taking as a basis the principles of the systematics of multi-tool setups on traditional automatic lathes [37], we will consider the transformation of indicators to the capabilities of modern lathes of the turning group, focused on multi-tool machining. The key issue of systematics is to identify the parameters by which the classifi cation is carried out, and the hierarchy of these parameters, which determines the levels and order of systematics. The proposed systematics of multi-tool setups is focused on the development of models of machining accuracy. The main feature of multi-tool machining is the force interaction between the tools in the setups [31, 32]. Therefore, the classifi cation is aimed at identifying the characteristics of force loading and deformation of the technological system during multi-tool machining. The basis of the scheme of deformation of the technological systemunder force loading duringmachining is the method of fi xing the workpiece. It is a common, single indicator for multi-tool setups. The mounting
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 6 4 4 method largely determines the possible types of tools and its placement in the setup. Therefore, it is logical to put this indicator at the fi rst level of classifi cation of multi-tool setups [31, 32]. Next, it is necessary to describe the types of cutting tools in the setup and its placement relative to the workpiece and each other, i.e. describe the setup structure itself. The basis of the structure of multi-tool setup is a set of carriages on which the tools are placed. Therefore, at the second level of classifi cation, there should be a description of the carriages involved in the setup. The third level is a description of the actual cutting tools that form the setup. The introduced three factors describe the type of cutting tools and its location. However, the force eff ect of the tools on the workpiece is determined by the cutting forces, the values of which and the direction of action are determined by another factor – the feed direction. The feed movement refers to the carriage, so it is advisable to attribute this factor, as an additional one, to the description of the carriage. In multi-tool setups, it is not uncommon for a cutting tool to be rotated relative to the base surfaces of the carriage with the help of special holders. Therefore, an indicator of the orientation of the tool relative to the base of the carriage, or workpiece is introduced. The classifi cation of multi-tool setups on traditional automatic lathes covers setups where the tools are working simultaneously. However, modern CNC machines equipped with a tool magazine allow organizing multi-tool machining with sequential use of tools. Having a single technological base and working from a common control program, these setups are subject to the laws of multi-tool machining, in the traditional sense of the term. Moreover, the machining accuracy models make it possible to take into account technological heredity and reach the design of multi-transition machining. Therefore, it is proposed to expand the concept of multi-tool setup, including setup both with simultaneous operation of tools and with sequential operation. Thus, we get 6 levels of classifi cation of multi-tool adjustments (method of mounting the workpiece, set of carriages, type of cutting tools, types and directions of feed of the carriages, orientation of the cutting tools relative to the workpiece, method of including tools in the work (parallel, sequential)). Summarizing the principles of classifi cation of multi-tool setups taking into account the conditions of modern CNC lathes, it is possible to develop a corresponding classifi cation formula: ( ) ( ) ( ) , y ij c c ij s s ijk u u i j k H Yk C k e S k e u k e ⎧ ⎫ ⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ ⎪ ⎪ ≡ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎨ ⎬ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎪ ⎪ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎩ ⎭ (1) where Y is the installation method sign; ky is the installation method code; Cij is the carriage sign; kc is the carriage type code; ec is the carriage location; Sij is the carriage feed sign; ks is the carriage feed type code; es is the carriage feed direction; uijk is the cutting tool sign; ku is the cutting tool code; eu is the cutting tool orientation; k is the number of cutting tool on this carriage; j is the carriage number at this working position; i is the working position number; ∩k is the sign of parallel (simultaneous) operation of the tools described in square brackets after this sign; ∩j is the sign of parallel (simultaneous) operation of carriages described in square brackets after this sign; Ui is the sign of consistent development of all working positions. For traditional multi-spindle lathes, the concept of a working position coincides with the generally accepted one. With regard to modern multi-tool CNC machines, it is advisable to expand the concept of a working position. Double-carriage CNC machines equipped with a tool magazine allow to organize a series of successive elementary setups with the simultaneous operation of several tools. Thus, on a modern CNC machine, a sequential execution of a set of multi-tool setups, understood in the traditional sense, can be organized. Since the apparatus of the computational theory of accuracy of multi-tool machining [31, 32] makes it possible to analyze such a sequence of multi-tool setups, it makes sense to introduce into consideration a generalized multi-tool setup, which includes a time-distributed sequence of traditional multi-tool setups with simultaneous operation of several tools. Each stage of the work of such a generalized setup, related to a separate set of simultaneously working tools, is proposed to be called the position of a generalized multi-tool setup. Such a sequential inclusion of traditional multi-tool setups is refl ected in the classifi cation formula (1) by the operator Ui with index i.
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Том 23 № 3 2021 EQUIPMEN . INSTRUM TS Vol. 6 No. 4 2024 The fi lling of the classifi cation formula (1) is provided by a systemof codifi ers. The codifi er of installation methods can be taken from [35, 36], since the mounting on CNC machines is the same as on traditional cam-controlled lathes, for which the above classifi cation was developed (Table 1). Ta b l e 1 Codifi er of workpiece mounting methods No Mounting method Code ky 1 In a chuck; in cantilever fashion 0 2 In a collet; in cantilever fashion 1 3 Between centers 2 4 In a chuck with a back center 3 5 Between centers with a steady rest 4 Ta b l e 2 Carriage type codifi er No Carriage type Code kc 1 Longitudinal 0 2 Cross feed 1 3 Top 2 4 Bottom 3 5 Rear 4 6 Pivoted 5 7 Compound 6 8 Turret 7 The carriage type codifi er should be expanded to take into account the capabilities of modern CNC machines (Table 2). The cutting tool codifi er is formed from the list of tools used on the entire group automatic lathes, both traditional (with cam control) and modern (with CNC and tool magazines) [38]. The feed type codifi er for modern automatic lathes has a much more complex structure and does not fi t into the framework of a simple coding table. Firstly, by its nature, feeds can be constant throughout the transition (parametric control) and variable (functional control). Feed variables are usually specifi ed as a function of the tool path. Secondly, the feed direction has a decisive infl uence on the cutting force distribution pattern. Basically, feeds are divided into longitudinal (along the axis of the workpiece) and transverse (along the normal to the axis of the workpiece). This was taken into account in the previous systematics [35, 36], by introducing feeds S1 (longitudinal) and S2 (transverse). However, on modern machines, the range of feeds is much wider. There are pivoted carriages, where the feed is carried out along the direction, oriented in diff erent ways relative to the workpiece. For example, a pivoted carriage on vertical multi-spindle semiautomatic machines. When machining tapered surfaces, the carriage turns along the guide and feeds in this direction. Such a case can be described as a feed in the direction of a given vector es. However, machining of the conical surface can be carried out in another way, by adding two coordinate feeds (longitudinal and transverse). This scheme works on most CNC machines. As a result, to describe the nature of the feed, it is proposed to use the feed code ks. And in a special way to designate only the functional feed: ks = v. If the feed is parametric, the feed type code in formula (1) is omitted.
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 6 4 4 The feed direction is given by the direction vector es. For the convenience of reading the classifi cation formula (1), it is proposed to introduce special notation for a number of special cases (typical) of the vector es (Table 3). Ta b l e 3 Special type designations of feed direction vector No Direction of feed and method of its organization Assignment of the vector es 1 Feed along the x-axis (longitudinal) x 2 Feed along the y-axis (transverse) y 3 Feed along the z-axis (tangential) z 4 Feed in the xy plane, perpendicular to the z axis (carriage rotation) nz 5 Feed in the xz plane, perpendicular to the y axis (carriage rotation) ny 6 Feed in the yz plane, perpendicular to the x axis (carriage rotation) nx 7 Feed in the direction specifi ed by the vector in xyz space es It should be noted that according to the ISO 841–74 and GOST 23597–79 standards, the information about the X, Y, Z axes presented in Table 3–11 for CNC machines should be interpreted as X⇒Z, Y⇒X, Z⇒Y. This is because, on CNC machines, the Z axis runs along the spindle axis, while the tool’s transverse movement occurs along the X axis. Accordingly, the feeds are designated in this manner. If the feed is formed by adding coordinate feeds, it is logical to describe it through the operation of combining these feeds. So, the machining of a cone by adding the longitudinal and transverse feeds will be described as: S(x)∩S(y). As a vector ec, characterizing the location of the carriage, the radius vector of the point of the working surface of the carriage can be taken. Here it also makes sense to introduce a number of special type designations for this vector (Table 4). Ta b l e 4 Special type designations of the carriage location vector No Carriage location Carriage example Assignment of the vector ec 1 x-axis carriage Turret x 2 y-axis carriage Longitudinal on ATL and HMAL y 3 z-axis carriage Vertical on ATL z 4 –y-axis carriage Rear on ATL, carriage located on top of dual-carriage CNC machine –y 5 Carriage located in the xy plane, perpendicular to the z axis Carriage with rotation function on VMSL nz 6 Carriage located in the yz plane, perpendicular to the y axis Spindle with tools on a CNC machine ny 7 Carriage located in the yz plane, perpendicular to the x axis Transversal carriage on HMAL, spindle with tools on a CNC machine nx 8 Carriage oriented in the direction specifi ed by a vector in xyz space Spindle with tools on a CNC machine ec
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Том 23 № 3 2021 EQUIPMEN . INSTRUM TS Vol. 6 No. 4 2024 When organizing multi-tool setups, it is not uncommon when, several tools are mounted on one carriage, individual tools are rotated relative to other tools due to the use of special holders. For example, two turning cutters are placed, rotated relative to each other by 180°. To describe such a situation, the orientation vector of the cutting tool eu is introduced in formula (1). Here, the vector eu characterizes the direction of the axis of the cutting tool. By analogy with the vectors of the feed direction es and the location of the carriage ec, in this case it is also possible to introduce special designations for common typical situations (Table 5). Ta b l e 5 Special type designations for the orientation vector of the cutting tool No Orientation of the cutting tool Assignment of the vector eu 1 Along the x-axis x 2 Along the y-axis y 3 Along the z-axis z 4 In the xy plane, perpendicular to the z axis nz 5 In the xz plane, perpendicular to the y axis ny 6 In the yz plane, perpendicular to the x axis nx 7 In any direction in xyz space eu 8 Direction of the main component of cutting force from the cutting tool Descending +; Downward – Since the rotation of the cutting tool relative to the carriage is rarely used, it is proposed to describe the orientation of the tool only in cases where this rotation takes place. If the orientation of the tool coincides with the orientation of the working surfaces of the carriage, the element of the classifi cation formula (1), which describes the orientation of the tool, is omitted. The main goal of developing models of machining accuracy in multi-tool setups is to create eff ective algorithms for controlling the design process of these setups, assigning cutting conditions that ensure the required accuracy of all specifi ed dimensions. The structure of control algorithms is largely determined by the type and number of control parameters. Since the spindle speed during multi-tool setup is the same for all setup tools, cutting speed is not a direct control factor. It can only be taken into account for each tool. The direct control factor is the tool feed, of course, taking into account the simultaneous operation of all setup tools. On machines of the turning group, the feed is set for the carriage as a whole. Therefore, the number of carriages used in the setup already predetermines the number of given feeds, i.e. number of control factors. As a result, it is advisable to distinguish three main classes of multi-tool setups: single-carriage, doublecarriage and multi-carriage. As follows from the classifi cation formula (1), on machines of the turning group, especially modern CNC machines, feeds are divided into single-coordinate and two-coordinate feeds according to the method of implementation. Single-coordinate feed is when the feed direction coincides with one of the coordinate axes of the workpiece being machined. A two-coordinate feed is formed by adding two feeds, each of which is carried out along its own coordinate. In this case, unlike the fi rst one, we have two control factors (two coordinate feeds). The main classes of the proposed systematics of multi-tool setups are considered bellow. Results and Discussion To create a matrix theory of multi-tool machining accuracy, a set of multi-tool setups was organized and classifi ed. As a result, a formalized six-level classifi cation is developed, which includes the following
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 6 4 4 parameters: the method of workpiece mounting, the set of carriages, types of cutting tools, types and directions of carriage feeds, the orientation of tools relative to the workpiece, and the method of tool activation (either parallel or sequential). This classifi cation takes into account the technological capabilities for organizing multi-tool machining for modern CNC lathes. The main classes of the developed systematization of multi-tool setups are single-carriage single-coordinate setups, singlecarriage dual-coordinate setups, dual-carriage single-coordinate setups, dual-carriage dual-coordinate setups, and multi-carriage setups. The developed classifi cation of multi-tool setups on multi-carriage and multi-spindle CNC lathes allows for the creation of a matrix model of accuracy for each class, which will undoubtedly be structurally simpler, as well as a unifi ed generalized model. Therefore, the classifi cation discussed in this work is aimed at identifying the characteristics of force loading and deformation of the technological system during multitool machining. The developed systematization of multi-tool setups on turning machines is oriented toward the development of machining accuracy models and can serve as a basis for creating recommendations for cutting conditions for these CNC machines. Using this approach, it is possible to systematically solve the problem of increasing effi ciency in designing and developing recommendations on cutting modes for CNC machines. Since multi-tool machining involves numerous factors, its design inevitably requires the use of computer technologies. Therefore, the proposed classifi cation of multi-tool setups can serve as a basis for developing the methodological support for CAD systems for new generation turning operations. Based on the proposed classifi cation, it is anticipated that a set of matrix models for machining accuracy will be developed in the future for single-carriage and dual-carriage multi-tool setups. The main classes of the proposed systematization of multi-tool setups Single-carriage single-coordinate setups. Single-carriage single-coordinate multi-tool setups based on a single carriage are used on various types of lathes with cam control. These include automatic turret lathes, horizontal automatic and semi-automatic multi-spindle lathes, vertical semi-automatic multi-spindle lathes, as well as automatic lathes for longitudinal profi ling and shape-cutting automatic lathes. Such setups are also used on CNC machines. It can be implemented on carriages of any type (longitudinal, turret, or transverse). On turret lathes, both the upper and back carriages are considered transverse carriages. The main feature of this class of multi-tool setups is that all tools are located on a single carriage, and there is only one control parameter: a specifi c coordinate feed. Table 6 presents examples of typical setups from this class. The standard setups are labeled according to the proposed system (1). For convenience of work, illustrated setups’ guides have been developed as an appendix to each classifi er (Table 7). Single-carriage dual-coordinate setups. This type of setup is used on CNC lathes for machining conical and contoured surfaces. In these setups, the contour feed is formed by summing the coordinate feeds, such as longitudinal (along the X axis) and transverse (along the Y axis). When machining conical surfaces, the feed remains constant throughout the entire machining cycle, meaning that control is performed parametrically. When machining profi led surfaces, the coordinate feeds are setup in accordance with the changes in the contour being machined, meaning the control is functional. These diff erences are signifi cant when developing control algorithms. It is essential for the accuracy model that it has two control factors. Table 8 shows examples of applied setups of this class. Dual-carriage single-coordinate setups. Multi-tool setups of this type are used on dual-carriage and multi-carriage lathes. These concerns traditional automatic and semi-automatic turning lathes with cam control, such as turret lathes, horizontal automatic and semi-automatic multi-spindle lathes, vertical semiautomatic multi-spindle lathes, as well as automatic lathes for longitudinal profi ling and shape-cutting automatic lathes. These setups are often made on double-carriage CNC lathes.
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Том 23 № 3 2021 EQUIPMEN . INSTRUM TS Vol. 6 No. 4 2024 Ta b l e 6 Elements of the classifi er of basic multi-tool single-carriage setups for a longitudinal carriage Tool Turning cutter Chamfering cutter 1 2 Designation of adjustments Turning cutter 1 [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 1( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u y u y ∩ [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 1( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u y u y ∩ − Chamfering cutter 2 [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 2( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u y u y ∩ [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 2( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u y u y ∩ − [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 2( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u y u y ∩ [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 2( ) 2( ( )) Y C y S x u x u x y ∩ − … … … … Profi le cutter 5 [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 5( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 5( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ − [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 5( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 5( ) 2( ( )) Y C y S x u x u x y ∩ − … … … … Drill 12 [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 12( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 12( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ − [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 12( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 12( ) 2( ( )) Y C y S x u x u x y ∩ − … … … … Ta b l e 7 Fragments of the illustrated determinant. Elementary multi-tool setups on a longitudinal carriage (the part is mounted in the chuck) Turning cutter ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 1 2 0 0 4 1 Y C y S x u x u y ⎡ ⎤ ⎣ ∩ ⎦ ( ) 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 4 ( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u x y u y ⎡ ⎤ − ∩ ⎣ ⎦
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 6 4 4 Chamfering cutter ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 1 2 0 0 4 2 Y C y S x u x u y ⎡ ⎤ ⎣ ∩ ⎦ ( ) 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 4 ( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u x y u y ⎡ ⎤ − ∩ ⎣ ⎦ Wide cutter [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 4( ) 4( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ ( ) 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 4( ) 4 ( ) Y C y S x u x u x y ⎡ ⎤ ∩ − ⎣ ⎦ Drill [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 12( ) 1( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 12( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ Сo n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e Ta b l e 7
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Том 23 № 3 2021 EQUIPMEN . INSTRUM TS Vol. 6 No. 4 2024 Ta b l e 8 Examples of single-carriage two-coordinate setups Setup name Tool Setup layout Machining an external cone with a single tool using feeds along the coordinate axes x and y: Sx and Sy Cutting tools for straight turning on CNC machines [ ] 0 0( ) ( ) 17( ) Y C y S x u y Machining an internal cone with a single tool using feeds along the coordinate x and y: Sx and Sy Cutting tools for boring on CNC machines [ ] 0 0( ) ( ) 19( ) Y C y S x u y [ ] 1 2 0 0( ) ( ) 12( ) 4( ) Y C y S x u x u y ∩ Note: Recommended setups are highlighted in red, while possible but not recommended setups are shown in black. T h e E n d Ta b l e 7
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 6 4 4 Setup name Tool Setup layout Single tool external profi le turning with two feeds Sx and Sy Cutters for CNC machines, contour turning [ ] 0 0( ) ( ) 18( ) Y C y S x u y T h e E n d Ta b l e 8 A characteristic feature of two-carriage single-coordinate setups is the presence of two control parameters – the feed of each carriage. However, these parameters are not equal. The feed of the carriage on which the tool that forms the considered dimension is mounted is a direct, immediate control factor. The supply of another carriage, the tools of which form other dimensions, has only an indirect eff ect on the accuracy of the considered dimension. Table 9 shows examples of applied multi-tool setups of this class. Table 10 shows examples of possible and applicable setups of this class. Dual-carriage dual-coordinate setups. These setups can be implemented on modern dual-carriage CNC lathes. In general, machining on each carriage can be controlled by two coordinate feeds. However, even the presence of such control on only one carriage, along with a second carriage in the setup, categorizes the setups into this class. Multi-carriage setups. Setups of this class can be carried out on traditional cam-controlled machines: automatic turret lathes and automatic longitudinal profi le turning. It is possible to implement such setups on modern double-carriage CNC machines, if an additional tool spindle with an independent drive is used. Table 11 shows examples of possible and applicable setups of this class. Ta b l e 9 Examples of elementary two-carriage one-coordinate setups (the part is mounted in the chuck) The tool mounted on the transverse carriage The tool mounted on the longitudinal carriage Cutting tool for straight turning Cutting tool for chamfering Cutting tool for facing surfaces [ ] [ ] 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 1( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 9( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y ∪ ∪ − [ ] [ ] 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 2( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 9( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y ∪ ∪ −
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Том 23 № 3 2021 EQUIPMEN . INSTRUM TS Vol. 6 No. 4 2024 The tool mounted on the transverse carriage The tool mounted on the longitudinal carriage Cutting tool for straight turning Cutting tool for chamfering Chamfering cutter [ ] [ ] 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 1( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y ∪ ∪ − [ ] [ ] 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 2( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y ∪ ∪ − Groove cutter [ ] ( ) 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 1( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 3 ( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y x ∪ ⎡ ⎤ ∪ − − ⎣ ⎦ [ ] ( ) 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 2( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 3 ( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y x ∪ ⎡ ⎤ ∪ − − ⎣ ⎦ T h e E n d Ta b l e 9 Ta b l e 1 0 Possible and applicable variants of two-carriage two-coordinate setups Tool mounted on the transverse carriage Tool mounted on the longitudinal carriage Straight turning tools used on CNC machines Turning tools for boring surfaces on CNC machines, used for machining contoured surfaces Cutter for facing operation [ ] [ ] 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 17( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 9( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y ∪ ∪ − [ ] [ ] 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 18( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 9( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y ∪ ∪
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 6 4 4 Tool mounted on the transverse carriage Tool mounted on the longitudinal carriage Straight turning tools used on CNC machines Turning tools for boring surfaces on CNC machines, used for machining contoured surfaces Chamfering cutter k [ ] [ ] 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 17( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y ∪ ∪ − [ ] [ ] 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 18( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 2( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y ∪ ∪ Groove cutter [ ] ( ) 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) ( ) 17( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 3 ( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y x ∪ ⎡ ⎤ ∪ − − ⎣ ⎦ ( )[ ] ( ) 1 1 2 2 0 0( ) 18( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 3 ( ) Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y x ∪ ⎡ ⎤ ∪ ⎣ − ⎦ T h e E n d Ta b l e 1 0 Ta b l e 1 1 Examples of multi-carriage setups Setups layout Designation ( )[ ] ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )[ ] 1 1 2 2 3 3 0 7( ) 1( ) 0 1 ( ) 3 ( ) 0 2( ) 5( ) Y C x S x u y Y C y S y y u y x Y C y y S y u y ⎡ ⎤ ∪ − − ∪ ⎣ ⎦ ∪
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Том 23 № 3 2021 EQUIPMEN . INSTRUM TS Vol. 6 No. 4 2024 Setups layout Designation ( ) ( )[ ] [ ] ( )[ ] 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 0 7( ) ( ) 7 0 0( ) 1( ) 0 1( ) ( ) 5( ) 0 3( ) 2( ) Y C x S x u y Y C y S x u y Y C y S y u y Y C z S y u y ⎡ ⎤ ∪ − ∪ ⎣ ⎦ ∪ [ ] ( ) ( )[ ] ( )[ ] 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 1 2 0 7( ) ( ) 12( ) 1( ) 0 2 5( ) 0 1( ) 3( ) 2( ) Y C x S x u x u y Y C z S y u y Y C y S y u y u y ∩ ∪ ∪ ∪ − ∩ − [ ] ( ) ( ) ( )[ ] 1 1 2 2 3 3 0 7( ) ( ) 5( ) 0 1( ) 4 ( ) 0 2( ) 9( ) Y C x S x u y Y C y S y u y x Y C z S y u y ⎡ ⎤ ∪ − − ∪ ⎣ ⎦ ∪ − Conclusions 1. A new, multi-factorial systematics of multi-tool setups is developed, taking into account the rich technological possibilities for organizing multi-tool machining for modern CNC machines. 2. A classifi cation of multi-tool setups is carried out with the identifi cation of the applicability of types of setups and the formation of setup classes that have a common mechanism for the formation of an error. The creation of eff ective algorithms for managing the process of designing these setups is substantiated. 3. The proposed systematization of multi-tool setups on lathes is intended for creating a matrix model of machining accuracy. The main feature of multi-tool machining lies in the force interaction between the tools in the setup. Therefore, the classifi cation of multi-tool setups aims to identify the characteristics of force loading and deformation of the technological system during such machining. This can serve as a basis for developing cutting condition recommendations for CNC machines. 4. The developed classifi cation of multi-tool setups forms the basis of methodological support for CAD systems for lathe-automatic operations and serves as the basis for creating CAD systems for new generation turning operations. T h e E n d Ta b l e 1 1
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV Vol. 23 No. 3 2021 MATERIAL SCIENCE EQUIPMENT. INSTRUMENTS 6 4 4 References 1. Shinno H., Hashizume H. Structured method for identifying success factors in new product development of machine tools. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2002, vol. 51 (1), pp. 281–284. DOI: 10.1016/S00078506(07)61517-0. 2. Moriwaki T. Multi-function machine tool. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2008, vol. 57 (2), pp. 736–749. DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2008.09.004. 3. Brecher C., Esser M., Witt S. Interaction of manufacturing process and machine tool. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2009, vol. 58 (2), pp. 588–607. DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.09.005. 4. Tomiyama T., Gu P., Jin Y., Lutters D., Kind Ch., Kimura F. Design methodologies: industrial and educational applications. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2009, vol. 58 (2), pp. 543–565. DOI: 10.1016/j. cirp.2009.09.003. 5. Shinno H., Yoshioka H., Sawano H. A frame-work for systematizing machine tool engineering. International Journal of Automation Technology, 2013, vol. 7 (6), pp. 760–768. DOI: 10.20965/ijat.2013.p0760. 6. Usubamatov R., Harun A., Sanuddin A. Optimisation of machining parameters by criterion of maximum productivity. International Journal of Production Research, 2014, vol. 52 (10), pp. 2946–2953. DOI: 10.1080/0020 7543.2013.857440. 7. Usubamatov R., Zain Z., Sin T. Optimization of multi-tool machining processes with simultaneous action. International Journal of Advanced and Manufacturing Technology, 2016, vol. 82, pp. 1227–1239. DOI: 10.1007/ s00170-015-6920-x. 8. Levin G., Rozin B., Dolgui A. Optimization of multi-tool cutting modes in multi-item batch manufacturing system. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 2013, vol. 46 (9), pp. 766–771. DOI: 10.3182/20130619-3-RU-3018.00357. 9. Cakir M.C., Gurarda A. Optimization of machining conditions for multi-tool milling operations. International Journal of Production Research, 2000, vol. 38 (15), pp. 3537–3552. DOI: 10.1080/002075400422789. 10. Dolgui A., Levin G., Rozin B. Optimisation of the aggregation and execution rates for intersecting operation sets: an example of machining process design. International Journal of Production Research, 2000, vol. 58 (9), pp. 2658–2676. DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2019.1629668. 11. Daoud Z., Purcheck G. Multi-tool job sequencing for tool-change reduction. International Journal of Production Research, 1981, vol. 19 (4), pp. 425–435. DOI: 10.1080/00207548108956670. 12. Torres W., Brand M., Serebrenik A. A systematic literature review of cross-domain model consistency checking by model management tools. Software and Systems Modeling, 2021, vol. 20 (3), pp. 897–916. DOI: 10.1109/ SYSCON.2017.7934729. 13. Yusubov N., Abbasova H. Models for machining accuracy in multi-tool adjustment. International Journal of Automotive and Mechanical Engineering, 2020, vol. 17 (3), pp. 8067–8085. DOI: 10.15282/ijame.17.3.2020.01.0605. 14. Kalidasan R., Senthilvelan S., Dixit U.S., Vaibhav J. Double tool turning: machining accuracy, cutting tool wear and chip morphology. International Journal of Precision Technology, 2016, vol. 6 (2), p. 142. DOI: 10.1504/ IJPTECH.2016.078189. 15. Brecher C., Epple A., Neues S., Fey M. Optimal process parameters for parallel turning operations on shared cutting surfaces. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2015, vol. 95, pp. 13–19. DOI: 10.1016/j. ijmachtools.2015.05.003. 16. Fu R., Curley P., Higgins C., Kilic Z., Sun D., Murphy A., Jin Y. Double-sided milling of thin-walled parts by dual collaborative parallel kinematic machines. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2022, vol. 299, p. 117395. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117395. 17. Zhao X., Tao B., Yang L., Ding H. Asymmetrical nonlinear impedance control for dual robotic machining of thin-walled workpieces. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 2020, vol. 63, p. 101889. DOI: 10.1016/j. rcim.2019.101889. 18. Yan Y., Xu J., Wiercigroch M. Stability and dynamics of parallel plunge grinding. International Journal of Advanced and Manufacturing Technology, 2018, vol. 99, pp. 881–895. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-018-2440-9. 19. Yamato S., Nakanishi K., Suzuki N. Development of automatic chatter suppression system in parallel milling by real-time spindle speed control with observer-based chatter monitoring. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, 2021, vol. 22, pp. 227–240. DOI: 10.1007/s12541-021-00469-2. 20. Weck M., Staimer D. Parallel kinematic machine tools – current state and future potentials. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2002, vol. 51 (2), pp. 671–683. DOI: 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)61706-5. 21. Azvar M., Budak E. Multi-dimensional chatter stability for enhanced productivity in diff erent parallel turning strategies. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2017, vol. 123, pp. 116–128. DOI: 10.1016/j. ijmachtools.2017.08.005.
OBRABOTKAMETALLOV MATERIAL SCIENCE Том 23 № 3 2021 EQUIPMEN . INSTRUM TS Vol. 6 No. 4 2024 22. Kanakaraju V., Hassan F., Kalidasan R. Numerical analysis of surface integrity in parallel turning. Part A: Infl uence of cutting tool nose radius. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2021, vol. 38 (1), pp. 186–190. DOI: 10.1016/j. matpr.2020.06.511. 23. Hassan F., Kanakaraju V., Kalidasan R., Norkey G. Numerical analysis of surface integrity in parallel turning. Part B: Infl uence of cutting tool chamfer angle and chamfer width. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2021, vol. 44 (1), pp. 266–270. DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.464. 24. Brecher C., Trofi mov Y., Bäumler S. Holistic modelling of process machine interactions in parallel milling. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2011, vol. 60 (1), pp. 387–390. DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2011.03.025. 25. Yusubov N.D., Abbasova H.M., Khankishiyev İ.A. Entwicklung einer projektierungstheorie für die mehrwerkzeugbearbeitung mit den möglichkeiten der modernen CNC-werkzeugmaschinen. Forschung im Ingenieurwesen, 2021, vol. 85, pp. 661–678. DOI: 10.1007/s10010-021-00478-7. 26. Yusubov N.D. Matrix models of the accuracy in multitool two-support setup. Russian Engineering Research, 2009, vol. 29, pp. 268–271. DOI: 10.3103/S1068798X09030125. 27. Bogatenkov S.A., Sazonova N.S., Yusubov N.D., Mammadov P.V., Bazhenov R.I. Increasing the productivity of multitool machining on automated lathes by optimizing the machining plan. Russian Engineering Research, 2021, vol. 41 (11), pp. 1071–1074. DOI: 10.3103/S1068798X21110046. 28. Bogatenkov S.A., Sazonova N.S., Guzeev V.I., Yusubov N.D., Abbasova G.M. Increasing the productivity of multitool machining on automated lathes by optimizing the tool positions. Russian Engineering Research, 2021, vol. 41 (11), pp. 1075–1079. DOI: 10.3103/S1068798X21110058. 29. Usher J.M., Bowden R.O. The application of genetic algorithms to operation sequencing for use in computeraided process planning. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 1996, vol. 30 (4), pp. 999–1013. DOI: 10.1016/03608352(96)00048-4. 30. Indrajit M., Pradip K.R. A review of optimization techniques in metal cutting processes. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2006, vol. 50 (1–2), pp. 15–34. DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2005.10.001. 31. Usubamatov R., Ismail K.A., Sah J.M. Mathematical models for productivity and availability of automated lines. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2013, vol. 66, pp. 59–69. DOI: 10.1007/ s00170-012-4305-y. 32. Ozturk E., Comak A., Budak E. Tuning of tool dynamics for increased stability of parallel (simultaneous) turning processes. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2016, vol. 360, pp. 17–30. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsv.2015.09.009. 33. Yusubov N., Abbasova H. Full-factor matrix model of accuracy of dimensions performed on multi-purpose CNC machines. Obrabotka metallov (tekhnologiya, oborudovanie, instrumenty) = Metal Working and Material Science, 2021, vol. 23 (4), pp. 6–20. DOI: 10.17212/1994-6309-2021-23.4-6-20. 34. Kurt A., Sürücüler S., Kirik A. Developing a mathematical model for the cutting forces prediction depending on the cutting parameters. Technology, 2010, vol. 13 (1), pp. 23–30. 35. Koshin A.A. Teoriya tochnosti i optimizatsiya mnogoinstrumentnoi tokarnoi obrabotki. Diss. dokt. tekhn. nauk [Accuracy theory and optimization of multi-tool turning. Dr. eng. sci. diss.]. Chelyabinsk, 1997. 290 p. (In Russian). 36. KoshinA.A. Obrabotka na tokarnykh stankakh: naladka, rezhimy rezaniya [Processing on lathes: adjustment, cutting conditions]. Handbook. Chelyabinsk, Siti-Print Publ., 2012. 744 p. 37. Koshin A.A., Yusubov N.D. Elementy matrichnoi teorii tochnosti mnogoinstrumentnoi obrabotki v prostranstvennykh naladkakh [Elements of matrix theory of multitool processing accuracy in three-dimensional setups]. Vestnik mashinostroeniya = Russian Engineering Research, 2013, no. 9, pp. 13–17. (In Russian). 38. Yusubov N.D., Abbasova Kh.M., Dadashov R.E. [Models of cutting forces during mechanical machining on modern machines of turning group]. Vserossiiskii forum molodykh issledovatelei – 2023 [All-Russian forum of young researchers – 2023]. Petrozavodsk, 2023, pp. 236–246. (In Russian). Confl icts of Interest The authors declare no confl ict of interest. © 2024 The Authors. Published by Novosibirsk State Technical University. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk0ODM1