Thank you very much for your kind feedback and your question.
Yes, we have also anlysed the contribution of the cooling lubricant free jet to the process forces by measuring without tool workpiece engagement. For our specific cases, the cooling lubricant pressure alone leads to cutting forces less than F_c,fluid < 6N. Therefore, in our opinion, this force component is neglectable compared to forces during the cutting process. Hope this answers your question.
Good work! It seems to be an efficient approach to determine the boundary conditions for the simulation model. I have a couple of questions:
1. How efficient is the meshfree FPM in comparison with the conventional CFD methods?
2. Which software/ tool have you used for the FPM method?
3. Have you considered chosing SST model over K-epsilon to model the turbulence?
Thank you!
Dear Mr. Suresh,
Thanks for the comment and questions. I can answer as follows:
1. As a classic meshfree method, it has advantages when boundary conditions change quickly or phases change. In our previous paper, we showed
the efficient for wet cutting https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827121007496
However, we have not made comparisons with other methods, but they exist in the literature.
2. We used the software MESHFREE. You can find more information on the following page: http://www.meshfree.eu If you need a contact, I gladly arrange.
3. Yes I can understand the comment. Currently new turbulence models are implemented and in future work we want to use them as well.
I hope this answers your question. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Nice work. Do you measure cutting force during testing?
Dear Mr. Kushnir,
Thank you very much for your kind feedback and your question.
Yes, we have also anlysed the contribution of the cooling lubricant free jet to the process forces by measuring without tool workpiece engagement. For our specific cases, the cooling lubricant pressure alone leads to cutting forces less than F_c,fluid < 6N. Therefore, in our opinion, this force component is neglectable compared to forces during the cutting process. Hope this answers your question.
Best regards
Enrico Barth
Good work! It seems to be an efficient approach to determine the boundary conditions for the simulation model. I have a couple of questions:
1. How efficient is the meshfree FPM in comparison with the conventional CFD methods?
2. Which software/ tool have you used for the FPM method?
3. Have you considered chosing SST model over K-epsilon to model the turbulence?
Thank you!
Dear Mr. Suresh,
Thanks for the comment and questions. I can answer as follows:
1. As a classic meshfree method, it has advantages when boundary conditions change quickly or phases change. In our previous paper, we showed
the efficient for wet cutting https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827121007496
However, we have not made comparisons with other methods, but they exist in the literature.
2. We used the software MESHFREE. You can find more information on the following page: http://www.meshfree.eu If you need a contact, I gladly arrange.
3. Yes I can understand the comment. Currently new turbulence models are implemented and in future work we want to use them as well.
I hope this answers your question. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Best regards
Enrico Barth