thank your for your very interesting presentation dealing with cutting force computational modelling based on form-shaping function theory.
In your presentation, the comparison of the experimental grinding force with the grinding force computed in two diverse ways shows that, while the computed grinding force represented by curve 3 displays a very good agreement with the experimental grinding force (curve 1) including the curve irregularities, the computed grinding force represented by curve 2 has also a good agreement with the behavior of the experimental grinding force curve but it displays a very smooth trend, i.e. no curve irregularity is evidenced.
Could you explain the reason for this peculiar difference between the two computed grinding force curves?
Dear Professor Teti,
Thank you for vey interesting question.
The grinding force equation (18) developed in the paper consists of three summands:
-the 1st summand describes the grinding force of the surface grinding under well-known purely geometrical approach;
-the 2nd one is a function of the motion error produced by the wheel unbalance; and,
-the 3rd one takes into account the wheel form deviations.
The curve 2 shows a sum of the first and the second summands, while the curve 3 demonstrate a sum of the three summands. Comparison of the two curves (Figure 2) drastically illustrate the effect of the wheel profile errors on the grinding force.
We believe, this qualitative and quantitative comparison presents a novelty describing the kinematics-induced component of the cutting force.
Best regards,
Dr. Emmanuil Kushnir,
Prof. Vladimir Portman
Dear Dr. Kushnir,
thank your for your very interesting presentation dealing with cutting force computational modelling based on form-shaping function theory.
In your presentation, the comparison of the experimental grinding force with the grinding force computed in two diverse ways shows that, while the computed grinding force represented by curve 3 displays a very good agreement with the experimental grinding force (curve 1) including the curve irregularities, the computed grinding force represented by curve 2 has also a good agreement with the behavior of the experimental grinding force curve but it displays a very smooth trend, i.e. no curve irregularity is evidenced.
Could you explain the reason for this peculiar difference between the two computed grinding force curves?
Thanks and kind regards.
Roberto Teti
Dear Professor Teti,
Thank you for vey interesting question.
The grinding force equation (18) developed in the paper consists of three summands:
-the 1st summand describes the grinding force of the surface grinding under well-known purely geometrical approach;
-the 2nd one is a function of the motion error produced by the wheel unbalance; and,
-the 3rd one takes into account the wheel form deviations.
The curve 2 shows a sum of the first and the second summands, while the curve 3 demonstrate a sum of the three summands. Comparison of the two curves (Figure 2) drastically illustrate the effect of the wheel profile errors on the grinding force.
We believe, this qualitative and quantitative comparison presents a novelty describing the kinematics-induced component of the cutting force.
Best regards,
Dr. Emmanuil Kushnir,
Prof. Vladimir Portman