FULLTEXT01

MASTERS THESIS IN PRODUCTION ENGINEERING
Deburring of components
A survey of current and future deburring processes
Ali Alallak
Supervisor Thomas Lundholm KTH DMMS September 2010
In collaboration with
DEBURRING OF COMPONENTS
A SURVEY OF CURRENT AND FUTURE DEBURRING PROCESSES
Abstract
The machining operations that shape a metal component produce a raised edge or small pieces of material remaining attached to a work piece called burrs and sharp edges. The deburring process is intended to remove these imperfections and produce specific edge profiles. Burr formation during machining operations is one of the most significant problems encountered by industrial companies in component manufacturing. Remaining burrs after machining pose a severe risk for component breakdowns, if the burrs get loose. All work piece edges must therefore be completely defect-free. In the machining industry manual methods are commonly employed for burr removal. Fully automating deburring operations present a major challenge. Furthermore, removal of internal burrs of various sizes and shapes from parts sometimes becomes an extremely difficult task which causes high cost for labor, time losses, and health and safety risks. Increasingly, manufacturers are expected to deliver burr-free parts to their customer. Sandvik Coromant, Scania and Volvo Cars are three of these manufacturers, and these three companies have agreed to contribute to this thesis. Sandvik Coromant AB is part of the global enterprise Sandvik Group AB, and is worldleading in providing and developing cutting tools for the metal working industry. The company operates in over 60 countries worldwide and its main production plant is located in Gimo, Sweden [www.sandvik.com]. Scania is a global automotive industry manufacturer of commercial vehiclesspecifically heavy trucks and buses. It also manufactures diesel engines for motive power of heavy vehicles, marine, and general industrial applications. Scania was founded in 1891 in Sdertlje, Sweden. Today, Scania has ten production facilities worldwide [www.scania.com]. Volvo Car Corporation is an automobile manufacturer founded in 1927, in Gothenburg, Sweden. Volvo Cars has approximately 2,300 local dealers and around 100 national sales companies worldwide. Volvo Car Engine is a part of Volvo Cars. Volvo Car Engine produces engines and other components for other units, and it is headquartered in Skvde, Sweden [www.volvocars.com]. All of the companies above have problems in burr minimizing and removing strategy in machining and deburring operations to achieve quality assurance. Therefore, to choose a deburring system, and to reveal the results of deburring operations, it is necessary to be able to inspect/measure burrs. But, unfortunately, most industrial companies today lack the specialized systems to measure the presence of burrs, which adversely affect the overall deburring process. In this thesis, different types and sizes of work pieces have been taken directly from the production to measure burrs, and conduct experiments on them. The thesis focuses on three areas: A survey of the current deburring problems, including burr classification and measurement, current minimization strategies of burr formation, and current deburring methods.
KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan
Experiments on new and improved deburring methods, including deburring tools (e.g. drilling deburring tools, countersink tools, grinding tools and alumina fiber brushes), water-jet deburring (multi-nozzle rotary lance jets, pure and abrasive single rotary nozzle water jets). A selection matrix as a thesis conclusion which relates these methods to criteria of deburring processes, such as process performance, industrial applications, quality assurance, safety and environment, costs, etc. This matrix can be a basis for a more detailed selection/decision matrix in the future.
Sammanfattning
Vid tillverkning av metallkomponenter lmnar maskinoperationerna kvar en rest av rivande metall p kanten. Resten bestr av vassa kanter och grader. Fr att f den efterskta kantprofilen krvs en viss efterbearbetningsprocess som kallas gradning. Graderna kan skapa stora problem i tillverkningen och det r drfr viktigt att verktyget r fritt frn onskade grader och vassa kanter. Inom den maskinindustrin anvnds oftast manuella metoder fr att ta bort onskade grader. Processen r tidskrvande och kostsam, men en total automatisering r en stor utmaning eftersom garderna r s varierande i storlek och form. Allt fler tillverkare frvntas leverera gradfria delar till sina kunder. Tre av dessa, Sandvik Coromant, Scania och Volvo Cars har bidragit till det hr examensarbetet. Sandvik Coromant, som r en del av det globala fretaget Sandvik Group, r vrldsledande vad gller att leverera och utveckla bearbetningsverktyg fr tillverkningsindustrin. Fretaget arbetar i ver 60 lnder ver hela vrlden och har en produktionsanlggning i Gimo, Sverige. Scania r en global tillverkningsindustri av fordon, frmst lastbilar och bussar. Scania tillverkar ven dieselmotorer fr tunga lastbilar, marina fordon och generella industriella applikationer. Scania bildades 1891 i Sdertlje, Sverige och har idag 10 produktionsanlggningar i vrlden. Volvo Car Corporation tillverkar bilar sen starten i Gteborg, Sverige, 1927. Volvo Cars har ungefr 2300 lokala leverantrer och runt hundra frsljningsfretag utomlands. Volvo Car Engine i Skvde, Sverige, en del av Volvo Cars, producerar motorer och andra komponenter. Dessa tre fretag har haft problem med att minimera grader som uppstr vid tillverkning. Fr att skra den efterfrgade kvaliteten r det ndvndigt att ha ett gradmtsystem som, mnga fretag saknar idag. I det hr examensarbetet har olika arbetsstycken tagits direkt frn produktionen fr att ge en varierad underskningsgrund. Examensarbetet har frmst varit inriktat p tre omrden: En underskning av de befintliga problemen, inklusive gradklassificering, mtt och metoder. Experiment med nya och frbttrade gardningsmetoder, inklusive gradningsverktyg (bl a hlgradningsverktyg, frsnkningsverktyg och slipverktyg, samt aluminiumfiberborstar) och vattenjetgradning. En valmatris som sammanstller resultaten av de olika metoderna. Kriterierna r prestanda, skerhet, kostnad, mm. Matrisen kan ligga till grund fr utfrligare underskningar i framtiden.
Acknowledgements
This master thesis was carried out during the period from September 2009 to August 2010 at KTH, Chalmers, Sandvik Coromant, Scania, Volvo Car and Fr Ramsrm AB. The project period was interrupted by some stops because of delays in decisions relating to financing of the project by the companies and the university. The work has been conducted in the form of literature study, visits to the companies and experiments. First, I would like to address my gratitude to my supervisor Thomas Lundholm at KTH for his guidance and support throughout this work, and DMMS (Centre for design and management of manufacturing systems) for financing the costs of the travels to the companies. Many thanks to the companies contact persons Kurt Forsberg at Scania, Hkan Sterner at Volvo Cars and Mats Erixon at Sandvik Coromant for for discussions and consultations during this project. The author would like to thank Sandvik Coromant, Scania and Volvo Cars for giving me the opportunity to visit and study their current deburring processes. It has been an interesting time with many interviews and discussions throughout the companies. The overall aim of this project has been to deliver a result that the companies can benefit from, which I hope, has been accomplished. I hope that some of the suggested improvements will be implemented in practice and will be found useful in achieving enhanced product quality. The author would like express his gratitude to the employees of the companies participating in this study. Several workers, technicians, engineers and managers have put in a great deal of efforts to help me carry out this project. Whether it has been in questionnaires, in-depth interviews or just minor questions, everyone has helped out in the best of ways. Without their committed participation, this project would not have been possible. Finally I would like to thank the manufacturing technology department at Chalmers University of Technology for their support, especially Gustaf Holmqvist and Hans-Brje Oskarson for their help in the water-jet experiments, interesting discussions and valuable opinions. Many thanks also to Fr Strm AB, Svensk Borstteknik AB and Square Tools AB for supporting me in the experiments.
Gteborg, September 2010
Ali Alallak
Table of contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 10
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................. 10 Burr formation and classification .............................................................................. 10 Burr measurement systems ........................................................................................ 11 Minimization of burr formation................................................................................. 12 Deburring process ....................................................................................................... 13 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.1.4 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
Problem area........................................................................................................................... 14 Purpose .................................................................................................................................... 14 Demarcations .......................................................................................................................... 14 Outline of the thesis ................................................................................................................ 15
2. Methodology ................................................................................................ 16
2.1 2.2 2.3 Literature study ...................................................................................................................... 16 Data collection method........................................................................................................... 16 Experiments ............................................................................................................................ 16
3. Survey of the current deburring problem ................................................ 17

3.1 Sandvik Coromant ................................................................................................................. 17 Company presentation ................................................................................................ 17 Problem background ................................................................................................... 18 Burr classification........................................................................................................ 19 Avoidance and minimization of burr formation ....................................................... 21 Current deburring methods ....................................................................................... 22 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.1.4 3.1.5
3.1.5.1 3.1.5.2 3.1.5.3 3.1.5.4

3.1.6 3.2
Machining deburring in single process ................................................ 22 Dry brushing method ................................................................................ 23 Tumbling deburring ................................................................................. 24 Manual deburring ..................................................................................... 25
Analysis and discussion ............................................................................................... 25
Scania ...................................................................................................................................... 26 Company presentation ................................................................................................ 26 Problem background ................................................................................................... 27 Deburring of connecting rods in the engine department in Scania......................... 27
3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3
3.2.3.1 3.2.3.2 3.2.3.3
Burr classification ..................................................................................... 28 Avoidance and minimization of burr formation .................................... 29 Current deburring method ...................................................................... 29
3.2.3.4
3.2.4
Analysis and discussion ............................................................................ 30 Burr classification ..................................................................................... 32 Avoidance and minimization of burr formation .................................... 32 Current deburring methods ..................................................................... 33 Analysis and discussion ............................................................................ 33
Deburring of main shaft in the transmission department at Scania ...................... 30
3.2.4.1 3.2.4.2 3.2.4.3 3.2.4.4

3.3 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.5 3.3.6
Volvo Cars............................................................................................................................... 35 Company presentation ................................................................................................ 35 Problem background ................................................................................................... 35 Burrs classification ...................................................................................................... 37 Current deburring methods ....................................................................................... 37 Analysis and discussion ............................................................................................... 38
4. Experiments for new and improved deburring ....................................... 39

4.1 Deburring tools ....................................................................................................................... 39 Countersink tool .......................................................................................................... 39 Huele deburring tool COFA ....................................................................................... 41 Grinding tools .............................................................................................................. 43 Alumina fiber brushes................................................................................................. 45 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.2
Water-jet deburring ............................................................................................................... 49 High pressure rotary multi-nozzles lances ................................................................ 49 High pressure radial-rotating single nozzle for deburring of intersecting holes ... 52
4.2.1 4.2.2 4.3
Cryogenic machining for burr reduction ............................................................................. 55
5. Conclusion.................................................................................................... 58 6. References .................................................................................................... 62
List of tables
Table 1: Burr classification of Sandviks turning and drilling tool holders on machining direction and burrs shape according to the general classifications ............................................................................ 21 Table 2: Experimental data for the deburring experiment using the countersink tool ......................... 40 Table 3: Experimental data for the deburring experiment using the deburring tool COFA from Huele ............................................................................................................................................................... 41 Table 4: Experimental data for the deburring experiment using the deburring tool COFA from Huele ............................................................................................................................................................... 43 Table 5: Comparison of structure and features with abrasives-impregnated nylon brushes [5].......... 46 Table 6: Experiment data for the brush deburring ............................................................................... 47 Table 7: Experimental data of the water-jet deburring using high pressure rotary multi-nozzles lances ............................................................................................................................................................... 50 Table 8: Experimental data of the water-jet deburring using high pressure redial-rotating single nozzle ..................................................................................................................................................... 54 Table 9: Selection matris....................................................................................................................... 61
List of figures and pictures

Figure 1: Typical burr and proposed measuring nomenclature [22] ................................................... 10 Figure 2: General drilling burr classification [13] .............................................................................. 10 Figure 3: General milling burr classification [13] ............................................................................... 11 Figure 4: Types of face milling burrs [15] ............................................................................................ 11 Figure 5: Measurement values of a burr [24]....................................................................................... 12 Figure 6: Methods of burr detection and measuring [25] .................................................................... 12 Figure 7: State of knowledge in burr formation [17] ............................................................................ 13 Figure 8: Five level integration required for burr minimization [17] .................................................. 13 Figure 9: Schematic depiction of the outline of the thesis .................................................................... 15 Figure 10: Sandviks industry sectors [www.sandvik.com] .................................................................. 17 Figure 11: Sandviks products types [28] ............................................................................................. 17 Figure 13: Turning and drilling tool holders which have been studied in the project [28] ................. 18 Figure 12: Sandviks tools applications [28] ........................................................................................ 18 Figure 14: Tool assembly process [27]................................................................................................. 19 Figure 15: Side milling burrs in a turning tool holder before deburring and after tumbling and brushing deburring ................................................................................................................................ 20 Figure 16: Drilling burrs/chips in the clamp screw hole in a turning tool holder before and after tumbling deburring ................................................................................................................................ 20 Figure 17: Drilling burrs in the clamp screw hole in a drilling tool holder after brushing and tumbling deburring ............................................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 18: Tool path strategies for minimizing and preventing burrs in face milling [18] .................. 21 Figure 19: Feature decomposition rules for burr formation control [19] ............................................ 22 Figure 20: Three axis double spindle CNC milling machine is for finishing and brush deburring of the workpiece in the same machine ............................................................................................................. 23 Figure 21: Triple-spindle and semi-flexible brushing machine ............................................................ 23 Figure 22: Tumbling machine in Sandvik Coromant ............................................................................ 24 Figure 23: Damage in a turning tool holder after tumbling deburring ................................................ 24 Figure 24: Hand and rotary filing in Sandvik Coromant...................................................................... 25 Figure 25: Damage in a turning tool holder after hand filing deburring ............................................. 25 Figure 26: Components of a typical four stroke cycle piston engine. (E) Exhaust camshaft, (I) Intake camshaft, (S) Spark plug, (V) Valves, (P) Piston, (R) Connecting rod, (C) Crankshaft, (W) Water jacket for coolant flow [6] ..................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 27: Burr location in the intersecting oil hole in connecting rod ............................................... 28 Figure 28: Drilling burr types [13] ...................................................................................................... 28 Figure 29: Microscope picture shown ring burr in the intersecting hole of connecting rod ................ 28 Figure 30: Drawing for the carbide countersink tool, Granlund Tools AB .......................................... 29
Figure 31: Carbide countersink tool sitting in a pneumatic drill unit .................................................. 30 Figure 32: Oil hole after the deburring process ................................................................................... 30 Figure 33: Burr formation when drilling intersecting holes [9] ........................................................... 31 Figure 34: Main shaft in Scania transmission department ................................................................... 31 Figure 35: Drawing and section of the main shaft inspected by a microscope shown the burrs size in the intersecting holes ............................................................................................................................. 32 Figure 36: Drilling burr types [13] ...................................................................................................... 32 Figure 37: Long shank tool operated by a drilling machine................................................................. 33 Figure 38: Variation of geometry relation drilling intersecting holes [8] ............................................ 34 Figure 39: Two diagrams shows total numbers of employees and geographic distribution of suppliers [7] .......................................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 40: Crankshaft (red), pistons (gray) in their cylinders (blue), and flywheel (black) [6] .......... 35 Figure 41: Picture and drawing of Volvo 5-cylinders crankshaft......................................................... 36 Figure 42: Burr location in intersecting oil holes in crankshaft ........................................................... 36 Figure 43: Drilling operation of the 60 angle inclined oil holes ( 5.95 mm) using a drilling tool ( 5.33 mm) ................................................................................................................................................ 37 Figure 44: Drilling burr types [13] ...................................................................................................... 37 Figure 45: Burr formation when drilling intersecting holes [9] ........................................................... 38 Figure 46: Countersink tool GH-K from Huele Tooling [Huele Tooling catalog] and picture of the oil hole in the connecting rod ..................................................................................................................... 39 Figure 47: Three-axis drilling machine ................................................................................................ 40 Figure 48: Oil hole in connecting rod the before and after deburring process .................................... 40 Figure 49: Heules carbide radial COFA deburring tool [Huele Tooling catalog] ............................. 41 Figure 50: Three-axis milling machine ................................................................................................. 42 Figure 51: Intersecting holes in main shaft and connecting rod before and after deburring using COFA tool ............................................................................................................................................. 42 Figure 52: Wheel grinding tool, 36 mm diameter, 6 mm thickness, Argofile AB .............................. 43 Figure 53: Micromotor electric power tool set and the connecting rod after grinding deburring ....... 44 Figure 54: Intersecting holes in connecting rod before and after deburring using the grinding tool .. 44 Figure 55: Alumina fiber brushes, XEBEC ........................................................................................... 45 Figure 56: Brushing deburring of connecting rod, main shaft and toolholder ..................................... 48 Figure 57: Microscopes pictures before and after deburring for connecting rod, main shaft and tool holder .................................................................................................................................................... 49 Figure 58: 3-nozzels high pressure self-rotating lances ....................................................................... 50 Figure 59: Experiment of the water-jet deburring using high pressure rotary multi-nozzles lances ... 51 Figure 60: Diesel pump with a full power 120 kw ................................................................................ 51 Figure 61: Microscopes pictures of the tool holder before and after high pressure water-jet deburring ............................................................................................................................................................... 52 Figure 62: General pure water-jet system [4] ...................................................................................... 52 Figure 63: General abrasive water-jet system [4] ................................................................................ 53 Figure 64: Typical design of water-jet nozzles ..................................................................................... 53 Figure 65: Workpieces and machines in the pure and abrasive water-jet deburring experiments....... 55 Figure 66: Cryogenic Process for Burr Reduction ............................................................................... 55 Figure 67: Burr formation in two cases dry and cryogenic machining ................................................ 57
1. Introduction
This chapter begins with the background of the thesis, with both a general deburring concept overview and presentations of the companies Sandvik Coromant, Scania and Volvo Car. This is followed by problem area discussion, purpose and demarcation.
1.1 Background
1.1.1 Burr formation and classification Burrs in machined work pieces are real productivity killers. David Dornfeld [17]. Burr formation affects work piece accuracy and quality in several ways, dimensional distortion on part edge, challenges to assembly and handling caused by burrs in sensitive locations on the work piece and damage done to the work subsurface from the deformation associated with burr formation. A typical burr formed on a metal component due to the exit of a cutting edge is seen in Figure 1 [22]. A number of things are clear from this imagethere is substantial subsurface damage and deformation associated with a burr, the shape is quite complex and, hence, the description of a burr can be quite complex. The presence of a burr can cause severe problems in manufacturing.
Figure 1: Typical burr and proposed measuring nomenclature [22]
The range of burrs found in machining practice is quite wide, especially when the full range of processes from drilling to grinding is considered. Figure 2 shows typical drilling burrs and their classification in stainless steel as an indication of the potential variation depending on the shape of burr [13].
cap
Figure 2: General drilling burr classification [13]
In the case of burrs after the milling process, different burr descriptions depending on application, manufacturing process, shape, formation mechanism and material properties still exist. The general burr description of milling burrs is based on cause of formation [13]. Four types of machining burrs were detected: Poisson burr, rollover burr, tear burr and cut-off burr, Figure 3.
10
Figure 3: General milling burr classification [13]
The Poisson burr is a result of the materials tendency to bulge to the sides when it is compressed until permanent plastic deformation occurs. The rollover burr is essentially a chip which is bent rather than sheared resulting in a comparatively large burr. This type of burr is also known as an exit burr because it is usually formed at the end of a cut. The tear burr is the result of material tearing loose from the work piece rather than shearing clearly. It is similar to the burr formed in punching operations. The cut-off burr is the result of work piece separation from the raw material before the separation cut is finished [13]. In face milling burrs were classified by Hashimura [15] according to burr locations, burr shapes and burr formation mechanisms. The burr attached to the surface machined by the minor edge of the tool is named exit burr. A side burr is defined as a burr attached to the transition surface machined by the major edge and a top burr is defined as a burr attached to the top surface of the work piece. These burr types are shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Types of face milling burrs [15]
1.1.2 Burr measurement systems Schfer [24] used a random cross section for describing basic burr parameters. He stated that each burr can be characterized by its longitudinal and cross sectional profile and defined the following burr descriptions and measurement categories: burr root thickness b, burr height h , burr root
0
radius r and burr thickness b .

f g
11
Figure 5: Measurement values of a burr [24]
Measuring burr geometry is necessary for any research with the aim to minimize or avoid burr formation. Currently, there is a large number of burr measuring and detecting methods available. The choice of an appropriate system depends on application conditions, requested measuring accuracy and burr values to be measured, such as burr height, burr thickness, burr volume or burr hardness. Burr height and thickness are the most frequently and easily measured burr values [25]. Leopold [25] divided measuring methods in two groups: in-process and out of process, Figure 6.
Figure 6: Methods of burr detection and measuring [25]
1.1.3 Minimization of burr formation Ideally, we would like to avoid or at least minimize burrs, by careful choice of tools, machining parameters and tool path or work material and part design. In fact, most burrs can be prevented or minimized with process control. Recently, more research and interest has been focused on problems associated with burrs from machining. The focus has traditionally been on deburring processes but understanding the burr formation process is critical to burr prevention. However, the level of scientific knowledge in this is just developing. See Figure 7. It is vital to be able to associate details of the part performance and functionality with requirements for edge condition [23].
12
Figure 7: State of knowledge in burr formation [17]
To effectively address burr prevention, the entire process chain from design to manufacturing must be considered, Figure 3. Here we see the importance of integrating all the elements affecting burrs, from part design, including material selection, to the machining process.
Figure 8: Five level integration required for burr minimization [17]
1.1.4 Deburring process The deburring process can be classified into two groups: (1) Point-acting methods; in this case the burrs are removed without much impact on other parts of the component. This group includes: - Hand deburring, which is performed manually by using various tools, including files, wire brushes, grinding tools, etc. - Rotary files with and without abrasives; for example, different types of brushes used for planar and curved surfaces, edges, holes, threads, etc. - Metal cutting methods, which can reduce the cost by using used inserts for chamfering. Countersink and chamfering methods are also metal cutting methods which can be combined with drills or taps. (2) Surface-acting methods, which remove not only the burrs but also affects other parts of the component. The examples of this type of deburring methods are tumbling, lapping and thermal-chemical deburring.
13
1.2
Problem area
What constitutes a burr-free part varies among companies and quality control departments. Burr-free means having no loose materials at an edge and having nothing visible to the naked eye that will cause functional problems in the ensuing assembly process. Burrs and sharp edges create many problems. Burrs on sheet metal parts, for example, cause premature tearing during forming. Plating over burrs and sharp edges allows early corrosion of the material, or poor fit during assembly. Fine burrs left by grinding automotive cylinders can cause engine failure. Undetected burrs on life safety devices can undermine performance. Edge quality is of concern for the performance, safety, cost and appearance of a part. Burr technology and edge finishing is a vast and complex process. Burrs have physical properties and thus have various acceptable deburring processes. Furthermore, deburring is a manufacturing cost and there are trade-offs between cost and product quality [13]. Sandvik Coromant, Scania and Volvo Car need to analyze and survey their current burr removal and edge finishing processes and then improve their deburring methods in order to assure edge quality and reduce the manufacturing costs.
1.3
Purpose
The purpose of this project is to improve current deburring processes and look for implementation possibilities for new deburring methods at Sandvik Coromant, Scania and Volvo Car by presenting a comprehensive survey of current deburring processes as well as testing new and improved deburring methods. The aim is to analyze survey results to find root causes for problems and present proper improvement suggestions to solve them. As a conclusion for this project, a general analysis should be made of current problems and implementing new deburring methods by establishing a basic matrix selection for the best deburring method.
1.4
Demarcations
A survey of the current deburring problems at Sandvik Coromant, Scania and Volvo Car. The survey includes burr classification and measurement, current minimization strategy of burr formation and current deburring methods. Experiments on improved and new deburring methods. A selection matrix as a thesis conclusion which relates these methods to criteria of the deburring process, such as process performance, industrial applications, quality assurance, safety and environment, costs etc. This matrix can be a basis so that a more detailed selection/decision matrix can be developed in the future.
14
1.5
Outline of the thesis
Introduction ch1
Background ch1
Burr formation classification Burr measurement systems Minimization of burr formation Deburring process
Problem area ch1
Purpose ch1
Demarcations ch1
Methodology ch2
Literatures study Information collection of the current problem by making questionnaires, check lists, visits to the companies, interviews, contacting with tools and machinery suppliers ...etc) Experiments of improved and new deburring methods Results collection in a basic form of a selection/decision matrix
Survey of the current deburring problem ch3

Burr classification Avoidance and minimizing of burr formation Current deburring methods Discussion and analysis
Sandvik Coromant ch3
Volvo Car ch3
Scania ch3
Experiments on improved and new deburring methods ch4

Deburring tools Water-jet deburring Cryogenic machining for burr reduction
Conclusion and discussion ch5

Selection/decision matrix
Figure 9: Schematic depiction of the outline of the thesis
15
2. Methodology
The method is a tool or a way to solve a problem and obtain new knowledge. Everything contributing to such purpose is seen as a method, according Holme & Solvang (1997). This chapter is followed by descriptions of the literature study, chosen data collection methods and experiments.
2.1
Literature study
Since the author of this thesis has decided to approach the problem using a deductive approach, extensive literature study was required. There is a not a wealth of literature about the deburring process in general, especially with respect to scientific research in the Swedish metal-working industry. Nevertheless, many scientific articles, and some of the books in the field of metal parts finishing, have been studied during the course of this project. Among these are the papers of CIRP (The International Academy for Production Engineering takes its abbreviated name from the French acronym of College International pour la Recherche en Productique) international conference on burrs (2009) at University of Kaiserslautern in Germany, and the book Deburring and Edge Finishing Handbook by Gillespie (1999). The first literature was provided by my supervisor Thomas Lundholm, and the rest of the books and papers were found at the electronic library of both KTH and Chalmers, and www.scholar.google.se.
2.2
Data collection method
Data for the project were collected from questionnaires, interviews, and observations. Questionnaires used contained questions asking for background data, so that answers can be grouped according to characteristics. The purpose was to get a general overview of the deburring process. Interviews with technicians, engineers and managers have also provided valuable information.
2.3
Experiments
Experiments are the step in the scientific method that is used to test existing theories or new hypotheses in order to support them or disprove them. An experiment or test can be carried out using the scientific method to answer a question or investigate a problem [26]. First an observation is made. Then a question is asked, or a problem arises. Next, a hypothesis is formed. Then experiment is used to test that hypothesis.
16
3. Survey of the current deburring problem

3.1 Sandvik Coromant
3.1.1 Company presentation Since its founding in Sandviken in Sweden in 1862, Sandvik has developed into a global enterprise, with multifacetted expertise in the field of materials technology. The business philosophy has been largely the same through the years: Sandvik shall be the leader in selected areas. Products are based on high value content and are developed in close cooperation with customers. Quality is the guiding principle in Sandviks global operations. [www.sandvik.com ] Sandviks activities are conducted through representation in 130 countries. The Sandvik Group has 38,000 employees, approximately 10,000 in Sweden and 6,000 employees in Sandvik. Annual sales are approximately SEK 55 billion. [www.sandvik.com]
Figure 10: Sandviks industry sectors [www.sandvik.com]
Sandvik Coromant, which is a part of Sandvik Group, is worlds leading manufacturer of cutting tools for the metalworking industry, with more than 25,000 products and over 2,000 active patents. The company operates in 60 countries worldwide with its head office in Sandviken and its largest production plant in Gimo, Sweden. A key characteristic of Sandvik Coromant is its large investment in research and development, as much as twice the R&D spending every year of the average company in its industry.
Figure 11: Sandvik product types [28]
17
Figure 12: Sandvik tool applications [28]
3.1.2 Problem background Two types of Sandvik Coromant work pieces have been studied in this survey, turning and drilling tool holders. There is a group of technicians working on the supervision and development of the deburring process in each department.
Figure 13: Turning and drilling tool holders which have been studied in the project [28]
Most of Sandvik Coromants tools consist of the following parts: clamp, insert, shim screw, shim and holder, which is the central part, as seen in Figure 14.
18
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Clamp Insert Shim screw Shim Shim screw hole Holder
Figure 14: Tool assembly process [27]
The remaining burrs on the edges and the holes of the holder which are formed by the machining processes (e.g. milling, turning, drilling and threading) are in most cases a main reason that hinders the final tool assembly process. Therefore approximatly 30 percent of the tools return from the assembly stations to the deburring process because of existing burrs on the edges around the site of the insert shim or in the shim screw and clamp holes. There is no inspection system to detect any burrs remaining in the workspieces before reaching to the assembly station. Workers and technicians use only the naked eye and fingers to discover potential burrs. Workers can be injured by burrs and sharp edges. The quality control system of the finished product at Sandvik Coromant today discovers too many burr defects. These burr defects should have been discovered during the earlier machining processes. Defect statistics are presented in Appendix 1 [27]. According to assembly workers, there are a lot of defects that can be detected at the assembly stations. The deburring process will therefore inevitable take place before the problem disappears at the labeling and packaging station. This is considered to be a large waste of manufacturing costs and time.
3.1.3 Burr classification According to investigations performed in the course of the project, all types of the drilling burrs as shown in Figure 2 exist in the production of tool holders at Sandvik Coromant. Poisson burrs and rollover burrs are often formed in the milling operation, Figure 3. To classify and then reduce or eliminate burrs it is necessary to be able to measure burrs. A microscope was used in this survey of deburring process at Sandvik Coromant (accuracy 0.0001mm) with a camera to measure and take pictures of burrs before and after the deburring process. The following microscope pictures (Figure 15, 16 and 17) show the burrs and the form of edges depending on type of the machining and deburring process.
19
Before deburring
After tumbling deburring
After brushing deburring
Figure 15: Side milling burrs in a turning tool holder before deburring and after tumbling and brushing deburring
Burr
Burr
Before deburring
Figure 16: Drilling burrs/chips in the clamp screw hole in a turning tool holder before and after tumbling deburring
Burr Burr
After brushing deburring
Figure 17: Drilling burrs in the clamp screw hole in a drilling tool holder after brushing and tumbling deburring
Burr height was measured after machining operations but before the deburring process. According to the above-mentioned general classifications of burrs, the burrs on Sandvik Coromant components can be classified depending on machining direction and burr shape as follows.
20
Machining operation End slot milling Drilling tool End slot milling Drilling Spiral milling Milling Turning tool Milling Drilling
Feature Slot Slot Hole Slot Plain surface Plain surface Screw hole
Burr type Top burr Exit and exit side burr Ring burr Poisson burr Top burr Exit and exit side burr Ring burr
Burr height mm 0.10 - 0.15 1.5 0.01 - 0.02 0 - 1.0 0.02 - 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.01
Table 1: Burr classification of Sandviks turning and drilling tool holders on machining direction and burr shape according to the general classifications
3.1.4 Avoidance and minimization of burr formation A better strategy is to attempt to minimize, or prevent the occurrence of burrs in the first place. This has two immediate benefits in that, first, it eliminates the additional cost of deburring the component and the likelihood of damage during the deburring process and, second, in the case burrs cannot be eliminated, it improves the effectiveness of any deburring strategy due to reduced and more standard burr size and shape. This requires a comprehensive approach to burr prevention and minimization consisting of a number of operations [16]. Minimizing/eliminating of deburring operations in GVH (Gimo-Verktyg-Hllare) department in Sandvik Coromant has been achieved by tool path development in the fine machining using CAD/CAM. It is thus possible to avoid the formation of sharp edges and burrs. The edges angles should be in the range 105-135 in order to avoid the burr formation. It can be argued that the target of combining machining and deburring in a single process can be obtained.
Figure 18: Tool path strategies for minimizing and preventing burrs in face milling [18]
The deburring team at GVH at Sandvik Coromant could also minimize burr formation, costs and time up to 80 percent by controlling the operation sequences (macro-planning). Machining sequences determine what types of burr will form. Each exit burr, side burr, or top
21
burr requires different deburring work as well as varying deburring costs. Machining operation sequencing can therefore be a feasible way of reducing deburring costs. The edge-precision macro-planner contains a set of machining feature decomposition and remapping rules that result in less harmful machining burrs. Figure 19 schematically shows these rules: (1) milling prior to drilling, (2) shallow slot/step prior to deep slot/step, (3) depth first in the slot/step milling, and (4) width first in the pocket milling. The corresponding rationale for each rule is (1) drilling burrs form more easily than milling burrs, (2) trade-offs between top burr and exit burr formation along the edge A, (3) avoid the formation of a curly side along edge B, and (4) trade-offs between top burr and exit burr formation along the island edges [19].
Figure 19: Feature decomposition rules for burr formation control [19]
3.1.5
Current deburring methods
3.1.5.1 Machining deburring in single process A three axis double spindle CNC milling machine is effectively used for finishing and brush deburring of the work piece, and can brush work piece by simply putting brushes in a tool holder. When appropriate, the machine changes tooling and begins a brushing path instead of a cutting path. These machines ensure the accuracy of features produced in the machining operations and can result in considerable savings by eliminating the need for separate brush deburring operations. The work piece edges are usually produced with too much or too little chamfering or rounding depending on the variation of wall locations from work piece to work piece. The brushes are stored in the magazines of CNC machines that have automatic tool-changing capabilities. Although some areas of the work piece may be totally deburred to final requirements, the need for the additional manual deburring will therefore be necessary in this case. The cycle time for brushing is about 20 s/part.
22
Figure 20: Three-axis double-spindle CNC milling machine is for finishing and brush deburring of the work piece in the same machine
3.1.5.2 Dry brushing method In the drill holder department, there are three-spindle brushing machines. An industrial robot loads and unloads each part to obtain complete deburring of a front face and both sides of the work piece. This type of machine has low possible flexibility of deburring. Brush flexibility can only be modified by changing the diameter or density of the wire. Brush aggressiveness depends on filament diameter, free length configuration, texture, density, and bristle material type, wheel width, brush velocity and work piece contact.
Figure 21: Triple-spindle and semi-flexible brushing machine
The brushes cannot reach all cutting edges, so the small work pieces (tool holders) are more difficult to deburr than large work pieces because the brushes have a fixed size but the work pieces vary in size. The disadvantages of the method are that all sides of work piece are deburred, not only the work piece edges, which mean more waste in time and costs. Dry brushing also impacts the work environment because it produces a dust of metallic materials which may affect health.
23
The cycle time for brushing is about 1-2 min/part for small work pieces and 3-4.5 min/part for large work pieces. 3.1.5.3 Tumbling deburring Tumbling deburring is used to deburr, clean, radius, remove rust, polish, brighten, surface harden, and prepare parts for further finishing. The process is fairly simple. A rotary barrel or container is filled with the parts which and is then rotated. The process usually includes media such as hard plastic particulars, sand, granite chips, or ceramics. Moreover, these media materials are available in a wide variety of shapes. Usually different shapes are used in the same load to reach into every geometry of the part. In the case of Sandvik most of the media materials shape is pyramidal [20]. The methods principle is that the rotated material rises until gravity causes the uppermost layer to tumble down to the other side. The barrel also has vanes, typically made of rubber, which run along the inside of the barrel. As the barrel turns the vanes catch and lift the parts, which eventually slide down or fall. A full cycle time can take anywhere from 2 to 8 hours with the barrel turning at 20 to 30 rpm.
Figure 22: Tumbling machine in Sandvik Coromant
Tumbling is an economical finishing process because large batches of parts can be run with little or no supervision by the operator. The disadvantages of this process are that the abrasive action cannot be limited to only certain areas of the work pieces which that lead to damages seen only after the deburring process, cycle times are long, and the process is noisy.
Figure 23: Damage to a turning tool holder after tumbling deburring
24
3.1.5.4 Manual deburring Manual deburring constitutes about 20-30 percent of the total deburring process at Sandvik Coromant, typically in the form of manual and rotary filing. Sandvik Coromant is continuing its efforts to reduce manual deburring which causes the worker injuries, and it wastes a lot of time and costs, and also causes work piece damage which leads to poor quality.
Figure 24: Hand and rotary filing at Sandvik Coromant
Figure 25: Damage to a turning tool holder after hand filing deburring
3.1.6
Analysis and discussion
The team responsible for the deburring process at Sandvik Coromant has succeeded in reducing its reliance on manual deburring and the tumbling method that adversely affect quality. But in order to prevent burr formation in the first place, all stages of manufacturing, from the design of the component through process planning and production, should be integrated. Potential part features and material constraints, tooling and process sequences and process variables should be also considered from a perspective of the potential for creation of burrs on the work piece. The process, materials, tools, work piece geometry, fixturing, etc. must be considered along with part functionality (part performance, fit and assembly requirements) as well as any expected or required deburring processes. That is most useful when clear standards and classifications are available, edge tolerances can be specified and the relationship between edge quality and part functionality is clearly understood [16]. Despite these attempts by Sandvik Coromant, the result is still far from achieving the goal of total quality assurance.
25
Evidence of this is that some burrs remained after the deburring process and that was detected and measured in the course of this project. For example, the height of remaining burrs after the tumbling method was 0.1-0.8mm and higher burrs/chips remained in the case of the clamp screw hole in a turning tool holder. And the height of remaining burrs after the tumbling method was 0.05-0.6mm, as seen above in Figures 15, 16 and 17. These remaining burrs and sharp edges were substantial enough to have the potential for causing injury to workers, and prevent or render the assembly process more difficult. In addition, the inflexible and large brushes can damage the work piece with such as stone damages, by increasing the radius of the work piece edges, and causing nonhomogeneous edge shapes. Such problems should be not carried forward to subsequent stations without being detected. According to so-called lean production principles the goal should be that in order to eliminate product defects, they must be discovered and corrected as soon as possible. Since workers are in the best position to discover defects and to immediately fix them, they are assigned this responsibility. If a defect cannot be readily fixed, any worker can halt the entire line by pulling a cord (called Jidoka). There is not a burr inspection/measuring system in use at Sandvik Coromant., Only thumbnails or the point of the pen only is used to detect the burrs and sharp edges.
3.2
Scania
3.2.1 Company presentation Scania is one of the worlds leading manufacturers of trucks and buses for heavy transport applications, as well as of industrial and marine engines. A growing proportion of the companys operations consists of products and services in the financial and service sectors, assuring Scania customers of cost-effective transport solutions and maximum uptime. Scanias strategy can be summarized in two words: profitable growth. Scanias operations focus on heavy commercial vehicles for transporting goods and people by road. This is the segment where the requirements along with the profitability and growth are the highest. Transport operations in this segment are dependent on appropriately specified and reliable vehicles as well as comprehensive services. With Scanias modular product system, customers can be offered optimized vehicles. The modular system provides a carefully balanced number of main components with standardized interfaces. This results in great flexibility. Scania focuses on markets and segments where sustainable profitable growth can be achieved. Scania operates in about 100 countries and has more than 32000 employees. In 2009, invoiced sales totaled SEK 62 billion, and net profit was SEK 1.1 billion. A growing proportion of Scania's business consists of service-related products and financing; during 2009 service revenue totaled SEK 15.9 billion [10].
26
3.2.2 Problem background The increasing power density in engine manufacturing as well as the complexity of parts in automotive production demand total control of burr formation, especially in regard of intersecting holes. Intersecting holes (base hole, first hole) and cross hole (second hole) are common in industrial production processes, e. g., as coolant passages in cylinder heads, crank shafts or gear shafts, as ducts in hydraulic elements, or in the area of fuel injection in common rails or injections valves. This part of the survey will examine two deburring cases at SCANIA, the deburring of connecting rods and crank shafts.
3.2.3 Deburring of connecting rods in the engine department in Scania In a reciprocating piston engine, the connecting rod connects the piston to the crankshaft. It is not rigidly fixed at either end, which means that the angle between the connecting rod and the piston will change as the piston and rod assembly moves up and down and rotates around the crankshaft, as shown in Figure 26. The small end attaches to the piston pin, or wrist pin, which is currently most often press fit into the connecting rod, but can swivel in the piston, a "floating wrist pin" design. The big end connects to the bearing journal on the crank throw, running on replaceable bearing shells accessible via the connecting rod bolts which hold the bearing cap onto the big end; typically there is a pinhole bored through the bearing and the big end of the con rod so that pressurized lubricating motor oil squirts out onto the thrust side of the cylinder wall to lubricate the travel of the pistons and piston rings [6].
Figure 26: Components of a typical four-stroke piston engine. (E) Exhaust camshaft, (I) Intake camshaft, (S) Spark plug, (V) Valves, (P) Piston, (R) Connecting rod, (C) Crankshaft, (W) Water jacket for coolant flow [6]
Oil travels through a hole in the connecting rod bearing through a drilled hole in the connecting rod itself, Figure 26. A burr in this hole may form after the drilling process. A
27
secondary burr may be formed in the deburring process itself of the intersecting oil hole in the connecting rod. Costs could be high in case of bearing failure due to such an oil passage being blocked by a burr.
Burrs
Figure 27: Burr location in the intersecting oil hole in connecting rod
3.2.3.1 Burr classification According the Dornfeld classification of the drilling burrs [13], burrs can be classified as a ring burr type, picture no 1 in Figure 28. Figure 27 shows a microscope picture of the oil hole.
Figure 28: Drilling burr types [13]
Burrs
Figure 29: Microscope picture shows ring burrs in the intersecting hole of a connecting rod
28
At Scanias engine department burr inspection is usually performed by a finger or with a pen, without any measuring system. In this project the burr height was measured before and after the deburring process by a contour measuring system (Mahr), which is available at Scania. According to the above-mentioned general classifications of burrs, the burrs in the oil hole (6 mm diameter) in Scanias connecting rod work piece can be classified depending on burr shape as a ring burr and the height of the burr is 0.03-0.06 mm. 3.2.3.2 Avoidance and minimization of burr formation Because the connecting rod is so closely related to other engine parts, the opportunities to alter factors that are key to burr formation, such as workpiece geometry, edge angle and the choice of material, are severely limited. For example, the oil holes in connecting rods open to holes in the crankshaft. Any change in location or dimensions of the rod oil hole may therefore prevent the flow or passage of oil between the both parts. But attempts should still be made to avoid burr information by testing alternative deburring tools with new features that may give better results. 3.2.3.3 Current deburring method The carbide countersink tools are best used as deburring tools, where burrs from a previous machining operation need to be removed for cosmetic or safety reasons. Burrs and hazardous sharp edges in the oil hole in connecting rod are currently removed a by using the drilling countersink method which consists of 90 degree carbide countersink tool mounted on a pneumatic drill unit and a tool path linear to the oil hole center line, as shown in Figure 30 and 31. Tool wear is 700 countersink holes per tool.
Figure 30: Drawing of the carbide countersink tool, Granlund Tools AB
29
Countersink Tool
Figure 31: Carbide countersink tool sitting in a pneumatic drill unit
Figure 32: Oil hole after the deburring process
3.2.3.4 Analysis and discussion The obstacle to ensure quality is the problem is that the process is difficult to adjust and the result is not stable because the burr formation occurs randomly. For example, sometimes no burrs may be formed during an entire month of production, whereas at other times burrs are formed with only brief intervals. No diagnostic or statistical system (e.g. risk and fault analysis) is currently used by the department for connecting rod deburring at Scania to reveal deficiencies in quality assurance and to search for the roots of the problem for the purpose of analysis and corrective action. There is a lack of a constant and permanent strategy to avoid burr formation, from the early stages of manufacturing processes, starting from the metal selection stage, and through the design and preparation phases (CAD/CAM) to the machining stage.
3.2.4 Deburring of main shaft in the transmission department at Scania A transmission enables the engine to function over a broad range of operating requirements that vary from a fully loaded standing start to cruising at highway speeds. At Scania,
30
transmission systems for heavy duty trucks have a main shaft and one or more of counter shafts depending of the truck model. The manufacturing of the main transmission shaft passes through many machining processes such as turning, hobbing, drilling, deburring of intersecting holes, grinding and honing. The type of main shaft material is stainless steel. The cutting speed is 9000 rpm 6.0 and the feed rate is 2100mm/min. The Burrs are formed in the intersecting oil holes with the main shaft hole after the holes drilling process. Burrs are hard, high and thick. The high rate production of main shafts therefore involves a special deburring method to remove burrs completely so as to achieve a high degree of quality assurance. Park [9] investigated the influence of the exit surface angle and found that burr formation decreases with increasing exit surface angles. The pivoting point that initiates plastic bending leading to large burr formation appears very close to the machined surface when the exit surface angle is 30 degree. As the exit surface angle decreases, the pivoting point moves farther away from the machined work piece and causes larger burrs [9].
Figure 33: Burr formation when drilling intersecting holes [9]
Hence the geometry of cutting edge plays an essential role in burr formation. However, burr formation is greatly affected by the radius of the exit surface. This is shown for burr formation on concave surfaces without offset.
Figure 34: Main shaft at Scanias transmission department
31
Figure 35: Drawing and section of the main shaft inspected by a microscope shown burr size in intersecting holes
3.2.4.1 Burr classification Burrs in intersecting holes of the main shaft can be classified as crown burrs according the general drilling burr classification [13], and specific visual inspection without measurement tools is usually performed.
3.2.4.2 Avoidance and minimization of burr formation According to the interviews conducted during this survey, no strategies are followed to avoid the burrs, for example through the design or the preparation process using the CAD/CAM because the design and the production planning processes (the proper selection of the sequence of the machining operations) is not subject to change in any way. There is thus no strategic project under the supervision of the production or design departments looking into possible strategies to avoid burrs.
32
3.2.4.3 Current deburring methods The current deburring method of main shaft intersecting holes which has been studied in this project is manual milling by a long shank mounted on a hand-held power drill. Any remaining dislodged chips are removed by a burst of compressed air. This equipment is cheap, but not very practical and it is time-consuming and requires a lot of effort. Workers find the method tedious, especially when the production rate is high. The method is often accompanied by errors and omissions. Since it is a manual method it quality assurance is not provided.
Figure 37: Long shank tool operated by a hand-held drill
3.2.4.4 Analysis and discussion The main hole ( 9.6 mm and 514 mm long) is narrow and long and there is no significant difference between the main hole diameter and the intersecting holes diameters ( 3.5, 4.5 and 6 mm). This increases the complexity of the problem. To remove or prevent these burrs effectively, burrs must be measured with accuracy. Since the burrs formed during machining are irregular and very sharp in shape, it is usually very difficult to measure burrs accurately. If the geometry of burrs is measured properly, the proper deburring method or processes can be recommended. Aside from the simple case of burr measurement on no exit angle surfaces, there are many intersecting holes in the drilling process where burrs get lodged at curved surfaces, such as in Scanias main transmission shaft. It is difficult to measure and analyze these kinds of burrs. Furthermore, burr-prone parts require a high inspection effort to assure component quality. Especially components whose reliability is affected by burrs need 100 percent checking, which is time-consuming and costly.
33
Figure 38: Variation of geometry relation drilling intersecting holes [8]
The small diameter and the length of the main hole of the main shaft also causes difficulty in the burr inspection and measuring process, which are very important to ensure the quality because of handling and installation of burr affected components involves considerable risk of injury. Also, burrs that are dislodged during operation lead to the risk of possible functional surface damage or flow disturbances in ductworks (e. g. at oilway holes), which can result in total loss of the functional units and may adversely affect the efficiency and longevity of the entire transmission system. In fact, the special geometrical relationships in intersecting holes lead to a permanent alteration of tool entry into and tool exit out of the work piece material since the beginning (from the design process). Therefore, continuous burr formation at the exit surfaces of the cross hole is not possible. Burr values vary depending on exit conditions. Because drill cap formation depends significantly on the tool exit position, this approach helps to determine the tendency of drill cap formation for different geometrical relationships. [8]
34
3.3
Volvo Cars
3.3.1 Company presentation The Volvo Car Corporation is one of the car industrys strongest brands, with a long and proud history of world-leading innovations. Founded in Gothenburg, Sweden, by Gustaf Larson and Assar Gabrielsson, the first car left the factory on 14 April, 1927. It was called V4 (Jakob).
Figure 39: Two diagrams shows total numbers of employees and geographic distribution of suppliers [7]
Volvo Car Corporation has a social responsibility towards its suppliers, who have been instrumental to the company's success. Some 70 percent of a car's value comes from the suppliers. Volvo Cars has approximately 400 suppliers that provide components for cars and about 3,200 that provide the company with other products and services. Volvo Cars strives for responsible relationships, for example by having a code of conduct for all suppliers to follow [7]. 3.3.2 Problem background The work piece which is covered in this survey is the crankshaft of a Volvo engine, figure (40). The crankshaft is the part of an engine which converts reciprocating linear piston motion into rotation. To convert the reciprocating motion into rotation, the crankshaft has "crank throws" or "crankpins", additional bearing surfaces whose axis is offset from that of the crank, to which the "big ends" of the connecting rods from each piston is attach [6].
Figure 40: Crankshaft (red), pistons (gray) in their cylinders (blue), and flywheel (black) [6]
35
Figure 41: Picture and drawing of Volvo crankshaft
The burr problem which has been studied in this project is the exit burrs resulting from intersecting of the 60 angle inclined oil holes ( 5.95 mm) with 90 angle oil holes ( 5.95 mm) as shown in Figure 42.
Burrs
Figure 42: Burr location in the intersecting oil holes in crankshaft
36
Burr formation
Figure 43: Drilling operation of the 60 angle inclined oil holes ( 5.95 mm) using a drilling tool ( 5.33 mm)
3.3.3 Burrs classification The burrs in intersecting holes of the crankshaft are considered to be crown burrs according the general drilling burr classification [13]. There is no inspection or measuring systems to measure burr height.
3.3.4 Avoidance and minimization of burr formation According to the interviews conducted during this survey, the company is making efforts to change the following items to avoid and minimize, or increase the possibility of controlling the burr formation so that burr locations will make them easier to remove: - Work geometry: work piece design, edges angles (e.g. chamfer) - Process sequencing: order of process - Process parameters: cutting speed, feed, etc. - Tools: tool geometry, coating technology and tool design. - Coolant supply: with drilling process leading to longer tool life, a decrease in burr formation because the metal becoming more brittle. 3.3.5 Current deburring methods Today in the deburring of intersecting holes in the crankshaft production in Volvo Cars is using an additional boring operation after the drilling operation of the hole.
37
As shown in Figure 43, the drill ( 5.33 mm) comes out of a hole that is ( 5.95 mm). The burrs that arise as a result of the drilling operation will be removed by going into the 5.95 mm hole with another drill (drilling tool) which is (5,93 mm). This method removes only the large burrs, while the sharp edges remain, and small burrs can possibly exist. 3.3.6 Analysis and discussion Burr formation in drilling depends on tool geometry and tool/part orientation. The intersection geometry as well as tool geometry optimized to minimize adverse burr formation, can be effective in minimizing burr formation. Burr formation in intersecting holes shows a high dependence on angular position under the same cutting conditions. Large exit angle yield small burrs. There is also a strong dependence on the exit surface angle (that is degree of inclination of the intersecting hole from perpendicular). In the case of Volvo Cars crankshafts the inclination of the intersecting hole is 60 , but research shows that an exit surface angle of 45 reduces burr formation [8]. Burr formation in the intersecting holes also increases as the feed rate increases, as cutting speed increases, and as the exit surface angle decreases.
Figure 45: Burr formation when drilling intersecting holes [9]
38
4. Experiments for new and improved deburring

4.1 Deburring tools
4.1.1 Countersink tool The countersink tool (GH-K tool from Huele Tooling that has been tested in this project) is a precision inserted countersink tool with one or three effective cutting edges and large countersink range. Positive geometry allows for high shear cutting action. Carbide blades (or inserts) are best suited for cast iron, aluminum and other non-ferrous materials and HSScobalt coated blades are used for stainless and steel applications. Inserts are easily reground to original accuracy. High shear cutting action eliminates secondary burrs. Used in manual and CNC applications with a 3-45mm countersink range, see Appendix 2.
Figure 46: Countersink tool GH-K from Huele Tooling [Huele Tooling catalog] and picture of the oil hole in the connecting rod
GH-K tooling can be used for hole sizes as small as 1/8 (3 mm) diameter and produce countersinks as large as 1 (45 mm) diameter. Replaceable blades are an economical choice and the GH-K blades can be reground using an available fixture. There are single and triple blade countersinks in a variety of angles including 60, 90 and 100 degrees. Chatter-free countersinking which provides stable machining at longer
overhang and minimizes vibration due to surface interruptions, entry and exit.
Three-blade sets are ground in sets and numerically marked and should not be separated. Each blade cuts at the same time reducing any chance of chatter. The experimental data is shown below in Table 2. The tool is fed into the part. The blades start cutting once the tip reaches the part. Continue to feed the tool until the desired countersink size is achieved and then the tool is pulled rapidly out of the part. The GH-K tool provides precision cut countersinks without chatter due to the shallow radial clearance which may require controlled feed rates. Shims can be added when more aggressive feed rates are required.
39
Deburring tool Machine Work piece Feature Burr height before the deburring process Cutting speed Deburring Time Supplier The distributor in Sweden Tool price
Countersink tool GH-K, blades 45
3-axis drilling machine Connecting rod-Scanias engine department Intersecting hole 6 mm diameter 0.1-0.3 mm 188 rpm 4-5 seconds Heule Tool Corporation Square Tools AB (www.squaretools.se) SEK 1966.50
Table 2: Experiment data for the deburring experiment using the countersink tool
Figure 47: Three-axis drill press
The experiment result is that 100 percent of burrs in the intersecting 6 mm diameter hole in the connecting rod have been removed. Full automation of the process is possible.
Burrs
Before deburring
After deburring
Figure 48: Oil hole in connecting rod the before and after deburring process
40
4.1.2 Huele deburring tool COFA The HEULE COFA deburring tool removes burrs from the front and back of a drilled-through hole without stopping or reversing the spindle. Whether deburring a flat or irregular surface, the edge break is always even and consistent. The tools patented design uses a unique TiN coated carbide blade that allows for faster feeds and speeds and provides exceptionally long tool life. The action of the blade cuts a smooth tapered edge break from 0.010-0.030" based on the tool size, see Appendix 3. The COFA tool will deburr the contours where two holes intersect. The COFA tool with a standard blade can be used for exit surfaces angle up to 15. Experiment data is shown below in Table 3.
Deburring tool Machine Work pieces COFA6, 6, 0/Z, back only, Figure 49 3-axis milling machine, Figure 50 Main shaft from transmission department of Scania, and connecting rod from engine department of Scania, Figure 48 Intersecting holes 6mm diameter Main shaft: 4-5 mm Connecting rod: 0.1-0.3 mm 2000 rpm 420 mm/min 4-5 seconds Heule Tool Corporation Square Tools AB (www.squaretools.se) SEK 1906.50
Features Burr height before the deburring process Cutting speed Feed rate Deburring time Supplier The distributor in Sweden Tool price
Table 3: Experiment data for the deburring experiment using the deburring tool COFA from Huele
Figure 49: Heules carbide radial COFA deburring tool [Huele Tooling catalog]
41
Figure 50: Three-axis milling machine
Controlled by a simple spring, the carbide cutting blade follows the contour of the holes surface removing all burrs while creating an even tapered corner break. The blade does not cut as it passes through the bore and will not damage the holes surface. The edge break begins only at the point where the blade makes contact with the material and then tapers the holes edge. This allows for faster feed rates since the tool slows itself down as it enters the through hole. The simple concept of the COFA tool has no adjusting screws or presetting requirements. Only a choice of common tool sizes and spring strengths for various materials and hole sizes. The experiment result is 100 percent of burrs in the intersecting hole 6 mm diameter in the main shaft has been removed. Full automation of process is possible.
Before deburring After deburring
Main shaft
Connecting rod
Figure 51: Intersecting holes in main shaft and connecting rod before and after deburring using COFA tool
42
4.1.3 Grinding tools Grinding tools provide an evenly polished surface without leaving deep scratches, unlike conventional papers and hard grinding stones, reducing the number of processes and improving surface roughness. There is a wide range of materials, size and shapes of grinding tools for deburring processes. Such tools should have sufficient sharpness for grinding and removing burrs, even on very hard materials, such as HSS (High Speed Steel). Typically, no follow-up is necessary since such tools rarely produce any return or secondary burrs. There are five characteristics of a cutting wheel: material, grain size, wheel grade, grain spacing, and bond type, Appendix 4. Data will be indicated by codes on the wheel's label. Material, the actual abrasive, is selected according to the hardness of the material being cut. Aluminum oxide is usually used for its hardness, strength, low heat retention. Its low specific heat makes it widely used as a fine abrasive in deburring operations. Experiment data are shown below in Table 4.
Figure 52: Wheel grinding tool, 36 mm diameter, 6mm thickness, Argofile AB
Deburring tool
Machine
Work pieces Features Burr height before the deburring process Grinding speed Deburring Time Supplier The distributor in Sweden Tool price
Tool UN 36 mm diameter, 6 mm thickness, Figure 49 Micro motor electric power tool set, consisting of a power pack, rotary micro motor, foot rheostat and hand piece cradle, Figure 50 Connecting rod from Scania engine department, Figure 53 Intersecting holes 6 mm diameter 0.1-0.3 mm 8000 rpm (Max. 35000 rpm) 4 seconds Argofile Japan Limited Svensk Borstteknik AB (www.borsten.se) SEK 187
Table 4: Experimental data for the deburring experiment using the deburring tool COFA from Huele
43
Micro motor electric power tool set, consisting of a power pack, rotary micro motor, foot rheostat and handpiece cradle.
Connecting rod after grinding.
Figure 53: Micro motor electric power tool set and the connecting rod after grinding deburring
Before grinding deburring
After grinding deburring
Intersecting oil hole in connecting rod
Figure 54: Intersecting holes in connecting rod before and after deburring using the grinding tool
The experiment results: 100 percent of burrs in the intersecting hole 6 mm diameter in the connecting rod have been removed. Full automation of process is possible. Roughness parameters for the exit surface of the area around the hole are Ra (Ra is the average roughness of a surface) = 0.82 m, and Rz (the difference between the tallest "peak" and the deepest "valley" in the surface) = 5.51 m
44
4.1.4 Alumina fiber brushes Fine Alumina Fiber brushes are suitable for automated machining for fine deburring. Cutting fiber has been extremely successful when used on automotive engine and aircraft parts, Appendix 5, because of their features as follows: Deburring of fine burrs (where the base thickness is 0.1 mm or less after machine processing) and finishing of edges. Precision parts, such as automotive engine parts that must be deburred while maintaining edge quality without secondary burrs. Suitable for use in machining centers, robots, custom machines, and drilling machines easy to automate. Superior grinding performance thanks to the self-sharpening action of the cutting edge of the Fine Alumina Fiber rod tips. The continuous cutting edge provides stable grinding performance. Consistently superior grinding performance can be achieved by establishing suitable processing conditions. (cutting depth and rpm) Can deburr and finish edges simultaneously. Can improve surface roughness in a shorter time, thus shortening the finishing process. Suitable for fine deburring and surface finishing of automotive parts, aircraft parts, and machine parts.
Figure 55: Alumina fiber brushes, XEBEC
The table below shows a comparison of structure and features with abrasives-impregnated nylon brushes. [5]
45
Fiber rods for XEBEC Cutting Fiber
Rods for abrasivesimpregnated nylon brushes
Structure
A single Fine Alumina Fiber Rod is made by binding together 1,000 Alumina Fiber Filaments (diameter 10m for red rods and 15m for white rods). Consistent rigidity This structure therefore maintains consistent rigidity and there is virtually no fiber rod configurationally change during the deburring process. A single Fine Alumina Fiber Rod makes up approximately 75 percent of the total weight. Superior grinding performance The self-sharpening action of the cutting edge on the Alumina Fiber Rod tips and continuous cutting edges provide superior grinding performance. Thanks to the multitude of uniform Alumina Fiber on the rod tips, stable and uniform finishing can be achieved; maintaining superior grinding performance.
The abrasive grain is impregnated in nylon. The nylon base gives it flexibility but low rigidity. So there is rod configurationally change in the deburring process.
Abrasive grain makes up only 30% weight; its self-sharpening action is weaker, resulting in lower grinding efficiency.
Uniform fine finishing
Due to the variation in abrasive grains diameters, its hard to get uniform finishes
No clogging
Self sharpening action of the cutting edge Due to less self- sharpening action, its easy on the Alumina Fiber tips, the tool does to clog the tool. not clog easily. High thermal resistance (approx. 150), the grinding performance is stable even in dry processing. Due to the low thermal resistance (approx. 90), the heat generated in dry processing results in decreased rigidity and molten nylon on the work piece. Due to low water-resistance, rigidity and grinding performance decreases.
For both dry and wet processing
Superior water-resistance, there is no decrease in rigidity, even with wet processing, providing stable grinding performance.
Table 5: Comparison of structure and features of abrasives-impregnated nylon brushes [5]
46
Burr Height Average (mm)
Result Distributor in Sweden Brushing speed (rpm) Tools price (SEK) Deburring time (seconds) Deburring tool Removed burrs (%) 100% 30-40% 80100%
Machine
Supplier
Connecting rod (Scania)
0.1-0.3
Alumina fiber brush 40mm
Drilling machine
2080
6-7
3342
XEBEC Technology Co. LTD.
Svensk Borstteknik AB
Ra=1.68 Rz=9.19
Main shaft (Scania)
4-5
Alumina fiber brush 5mm
Hand Electric Micromotor
8000
20-25
540
Tool holder (Sandvik)
1-3
Alumina fiber brush 5, 25 mm
Drilling machine
2080
2107
Ra=1.12 Rz=7.38
*Roughness parameters for the exit surface of the area around hole, Ra is the average roughness of a surface and Rz is the difference between the tallest "peak" and the deepest "valley" in the surface
Table 6: Experiment data for the brush deburring
Brushingdeburring of main shaft
47
Roughness parameters Ra, Rz * -
Brushingdeburring of connecting rod
Brushingdeburring of tool holder
Figure 56: Brushing deburring of connecting rod, main shaft and tool holder
Before deburring
After deburring
Main shaft
Connecting rod
48
Toolholder
Figure 57: Microscopic pictures before and after deburring of connecting rod, main shaft and tool holder
4.2
Water-jet deburring
Water-jet is a generic term used to describe equipment that uses a high pressure stream of water for cutting or cleaning purposes. Abrasive-jet is a subcategory of water-jet in which an abrasive is introduced to accelerate the process. Pure water-jet is a phrase for specifically distinguishing water-jets that do not use an abrasive. In other words: abrasive jet and pure water jet are types of water-jet, and water-jet is a type of machinery. Water-jet is fast, flexible, reasonably precise, and in the last few years has become friendly and easy to use. The technology uses high-pressure water being forced through a small hole (typically called the "orifice" or "jewel") to concentrate an extreme amount of energy in a small area. [4] The use of water jet technology is a promising method for deburring. Water-jet machining is now providing a simple and economical approach to selectively removing burrs from areas that are difficult to access with consistent results and absolute uniformity. High-pressure water deburring has a number of advantages over other deburring processes, the first and foremost being that the part is clean and free of machining media remnants (such as grit from grit blasting) after deburring. Manual deburring results in inconsistent quality, the work is often labor intensive, and internal features are very often difficult to reach. Even when deburred, the part still needs to be cleaned. With robotic deburring using grit blasting, again, internal features cannot always be reached, very small chips cannot be removed with total certainty, and, again, parts still need to be post processed (i.e., checked for the presence of grit and processed for residual grit removal). Water-jet solves many of the problems where burrs are either difficult to reach or unsuitable for automation. It can deburr miniature parts as well as large parts, and does not result in the generation of heat affected zones. [11]
4.2.1 High pressure rotary multi-nozzles lances Three-nozzle high pressure self-rotating head turns an ordinary high-pressure lance into a superior water-jet tool, and rotates by the reaction energy of the high-pressure water; no external driver is needed.
49
It features an air-driven rotary swivel which drives the multiple orifice nozzle assembly. This nozzle configuration produces a powerful ultra-high pressure jetting spray in a wide pattern. Switching from single-lance to dual-lance operation is easy.
Figure 58: Tree-nozzle high pressure self-rotating lances
Features: Variable speed rotation up to 3000rpm. Dual triggers must both be activated for lance operation. Instant dump to low pressure upon trigger release. Faster production rates due to wide spray pattern and force. Reduces back thrust for operator. Self-lubricated. The experiment data are shown below in Table 7.
Deburring tool Pump Work piece Features Burr height before the deburring process Water-jet pressure Flow rate Deburring time Distance between the tool and work piece Angle between the tool and work piece Supplier The distributor in Sweden Rotary triple nozzles water-jet lancer, 0.6 mm diameter x 3 nozzles, 60 mm lance diameter, Figure 58 Diesel pump has a full power 120 kw and a test power 80-90 kw distributed on 3 nozzles, 10-15% of the pump power goes to the lance rotation operation, Figure 60 Milling tool holder from Sandvik Coromant, Figure 58 Various features and edges 1-4 mm 2450 bar 20 l/min 5-7 seconds 100-120 mm 70-80 Hammelmann Fr Ramstrm AB (www.ramstrom.se)
Table 7: Experimental data of the water-jet deburring using high pressure rotary multi-nozzles lances
50
Milling tool holder from Sandvik Coromant
Rotary triple nozzle water-jet lance, 0.6 mm diameter x 3 nozzles, 60 mm lance diameter
High-pressure deburring
Figure 59: Experiment of water-jet deburring using high pressure rotary multi-nozzle lance
Figure 60: Diesel pump with a full power 120 kw
51
Before deburring
After deburring
Shim screw hole in the toolholder
Figure 61: Microscope pictures of the tool holder before and after high pressure water-jet deburring
The test result is that 30-50 percent of burrs on the exit surface of the shim screw hole in Sandviks milling tool holder have been removed. Removed burrs are often high and not thick, or their roots are not thick and not fully fixed on the edge of the hole, Figure 61. Full automation of water-jet deburring process using rotary multi-nozzle lances is possible. High pressure radial-rotating single nozzle for deburring of intersecting holes Pure water-jet uses the beam of water exiting the orifice to cut soft material like diapers, candy bars, and thin soft wood, but are not effective for cutting harder materials. The inlet water for a pure water-jet is pressurized between 20000 and 60000 pounds per square inch (PSI) (1300 to 6200 bar). This is forced through a tiny hole in the jewel, which is typically 0.007" to 0.020" in diameter (0.18 to 0.4 mm). This creates a very high-velocity, very thin beam of water (which is why some people refer to water-jet as "water lasers") being propelled at close to the speed of sound (about 600 mph or 960 km/h) [4]. 4.2.2
Figure 62: General pure water-jet system [4]
An abrasive-jet starts out the same as a pure water-jet. As the thin stream of water leaves the jewel, however, abrasive is added to the stream and mixed. The high-velocity water exiting the jewel creates a vacuum which pulls abrasive from the abrasive line, which then mixes with the water in the mixing tube. The beam of water accelerates abrasive particles to speeds fast enough to cut through much harder materials.
52
Figure 63: General abrasive water-jet system [4]
The cutting action of an abrasive jet is two-fold. The force of the water and abrasive erodes the material, even if the jet is stationary (which is how the material is initially pierced). The cutting action is greatly enhanced if the abrasive jet stream is moved across the material and the ideal speed of movement depends on a variety of factors, including the material, the shape of the part, the water pressure and the type of abrasive. Controlling the speed of the abrasive jet nozzle is crucial to efficient and economical machining [4].
Figure 64: Typical design of water-jet nozzles
Water-jet typically comes as complete system, including the high-pressure water pump, a system to precisely position the water-jet nozzle, a tank to catch the waste water, and an abrasive feed system. Prices run from USD 50000 to 300000, with USD 150000 being about average for a mid-range water-jet system. Prices can run considerably higher than this for custom systems or very large water-jet cutting systems. Water-jet systems are not currently something for the home workshop. You'll find them in use in machining shops and industrial workshops. Among other factors, you need industrial levels of electricity to power the pumps (which can draw as much as 50 A; some pumps require 250 A to get started). Experiment data are shown below in Table 7.
W N o o r z k z p B l i u e e r p c r a e h t f e h e i D a g e d t h b i u t u a r a r m N e v r e o s e i W t z r n a e P z a g t r r l g m e ( e e a r m s d ( c f m s i m h l ) u a m i o r m A D ) n w e b e ( t r b r b e a u a a r s t r i r e ) v i ( C e n l o t g / s y t m t p i i s e m n ( e ) S ( E S K e ) c * )
Result
53
Roughness parameters Ra, Rz ** Pure waterjet Abrasive water-jet Main hole diameter = 9.6mm, intersecting hole diameter = 6 mm Main hole diameter = 9.6mm, intersecting hole diameter = 6mm 9.4 4-5 Three-axis water-jet cutting machine + pump (Chalmers) Three-axis water-jet cutting machine + pump (Chalmers) 0.45 2000 4.5 None 10 375 000-1 125 000 9.00 4-5 0.25 0.8 2000 1.34 Sand GMA / garnet, 80 mesh , 225 g/min 10 1 125 000 Ra= 2.32 Rz= 14.75
* 1 USD = 7.5 SEK **Roughness parameters for the exit surface of the area around hole, Ra is the average roughness of a surface and Rz is the difference between the tallest "peak" and the deepest "valley" in the surface
50-60 %
100%
Table 8: Experiment data for the water-jet deburring using high pressure radial-rotating single nozzle
Two parts of the main shaft
Three-axis water-jet cutting machine and high pressure pump
54
Removed burrs (%)
Pure water-jet deburring and section of main shaft used for inspection and measuring
Main Hole
Intersecting Hole
Nozzel Path (Jet Path)
Abrasive waterjet deburring and sand as a abrasive medium
Figure 65: Work pieces and machines in pure and abrasive water-jet deburring experiments
The pure water-jet method has been developed industrially by the German Hammelmann company, as shown in Appendix (6), for deburring of crankshafts. Wet abrasive blasting system combines the force of a high-pressure water jet with the deburring action of abrasive media, minimizing costly sand consumption and eliminating many of the health and environmental hazards often associated with dry sand blasting.
4.3
Cryogenic machining for burr reduction
The cryogenic process for burr reduction works because burrs are frozen stiff (or become brittle) by cooling the edge of the component with (N-cryogenic liquid) or (CO2-dry ice snow) during the machining process.
Figure 66: Cryogenic process for purr reduction
55
The cryogenic method is a quick and cost-effective processes that allow for the complete removal of machine burrs without affecting the surface finish or geometry of the part. It is also a safe, clean, and cost-effective alternative to traditional hand, vibratory or tumbling methods. The method can be used for the work piece parts/functions which are difficult to access using conventional deburring methods, such as intersecting holes (base hole-first hole, and cross hole-second hole) which are common in industrial production processes, e. g., as coolant ducts in cylinder heads, crank shafts or gear shafts, as ducts in hydraulic elements or in the area of fuel injection in common rails or injections valves. Furthermore, a considerably increase of process reliability can be achieved with cryogenic processes (e.g. cryogenic nitrogen or CO2 process cooling) as well as remarkable reductions of process times for deburring and quality inspections. In the case of burr reduction in drilling intersecting holes, and some of the inaccessible locations in milling planes/functions, this method can be considered as a practical, effective, economic and clean method, when compared, for example, with electro-chemical methods, which need a high detection and removal effort for burrs located inside of drilled holes. But that needs further researches, investigations and practical experiments in the future. An experiment in burr minimization in turning operations by using the cryogenic machining process was performed by Peter Krajnik and Andreas Archenti at the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia [29]. It has been observed from the experience with steel work pieces that in dry machining the observed burrs were very large, mainly due to the extreme toughness of the material. On the other hand burr formation is drastically reduced in cryogenic machining. One reason could be that low temperatures affect material properties of the work and that less worn inserts yield smaller burrs [12]. There has been no published research so far on the effects of cryogenic cooling on burr formation. Cryogenic machining is not even mentioned in the recent CIRP (The International Academy for Production Engineering) keynote review of burr formation.
56
Dry machining
Cryogenic machining
Figure 67: Burr formation in two cases, dry and cryogenic machining [29]
57
5. Conclusion
The implementation of integrated burr control methodologies is necessary to overcome the limitations of burr issues in machining. The developments of integrated strategies for burr minimization depend on: The continuous improvement of predictive models with competent databases for process specification simulation models by using, for example, finite element modeling (FEM) of burr formation for burr reduction linked to computer aided design/manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems for product design and process planning. Measurement and inspection strategies for burr detection and characterization, including special burr inspection/measuring systems. Development of specifications/classifications and standards for burr description and measurement.
According to the study of the literature and the survey of the burr problem at some Swedish industrial companies in this project, the feed rate usually plays an important role in the development of drilling burrs. In addition, drilling tool geometry can affect the size and shape of burrs formed, as well as prevent burr formation in some cases. Analytical models are increasingly supplemented by finite element method (FEM) models of the drilling process to predict effects of drill geometry, process parameters and work piece characteristics on the size and shape of burrs. In addition, the problem of burr formation in intersecting holes in precision components is well suited to analytical approaches for parameter selection and tool design. In case of the burr formed from milling operations, the kinematics of tool exits from the work piece is the most important factor in burr formation. An adjusting of the tool path over the work piece should therefore be made to avoid milling burrs. Sandvik has succeeded in reducing edges after it adopted such a tool path improvement strategy. From the principles of the tool path strategy it can be concluded that is always machining on to the part edge as possible and move/create any burr on a last of a less significant edge by a good attention to operations sequences. In this project some of the new and improved deburring methods and some of the experiments have been done on actual work pieces from the respective manufacturers. As a practical and industrial useful result, a decision/selection matrix has been formulated linking deburring methods with the criteria which control the deburring process. It is a basic matrix for further research and future development. The procedure used to create this matrix is found in Appendix 7.
58
Weight * Rating = Score Scoring: 5 = high 3 = medium 1 = low
Deburring Methods
Abrasive Single Rotary Nozzle - Jet
Important Features
Performance: Practical Method High Precision Smooth Running High Capability High Productivity High Automation Possibility Availability for Customization Method Flexibility W 5 3 3 4 4 5 3 4 W*R=S 5*2=10 3*1=3 3*2=6 4*3=12 4*2=8 5*4=20 3*4=12 4*3=12
W*R=S 5*4=20 3*3=9 3*3=9 4*4=16 4*4=16 5*5=25 3*4=12 4*3=12
Pure Single Rotary Nozzle - Jet
Multi-nozzles Rotary Lance
W*R=S 5*4=20 3*4=12 3*3=9 4*4=16 4*4=16 5*5=25 3*4=12 4*3=12
W*R=S 5*4=20 3*5=15 3*4=12 4*4=16 4*5=20 5*5=25 3*5=15 4*4=16
W*R=S 5*3=15 3*3=9 3*3=9 4*3=12 4*3=12 5*5=25 3*4=12 4*4=16
W*R=S 5*5=25 3*3=9 3*3=9 4*3=12 4*3=12 5*5=25 3*3=9 4*3=12
W*R=S 5*3=15 3*3=9 3*3=9 4*3=12 4*3=12 5*4=20 3*3=9 4*2=8
59
Cryogenic Machining For Burr Reduction
Water Jet Deburring Brushing (New Alumina Fiber) Deburring/Chamfering Tools
Weight / Priority
Grinding Tools
Industrial Applications: Transmission Main Shaft Engine Connecting Rod Engine Crankshaft Engine Camshaft Other Industrial Applications Work piece Surface Features: Plain Surface Slot Counter Cylindrical Surface Straight Hole Declined Hole Intersecting Holes Intersecting Hole - Declined Surface Quality Assurance: 100% Burr Removing: Drilling Ring Burr Drilling Crown Burr Milling Burr Turning Burr Less Remained Burr 5 5 5 5 5 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*2=10 5*1=5 5*3=15 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*3=15 5*4=20 5*5=25 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*5=25 5*5=25 5*5=25 5*3=15 5*1=5 5*5=25 5*3=15 5*1=5 5*3=15 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*4=20 5*2=10 5*4=20 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*4=20 5*4=20 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*5=25 5*5=25 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*5=25 5*1=5 5*5=25 5*5=25 5*5=25 5*5=25 5*3=15 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*4=20 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*4=20 5*4=20 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*4=20 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*4=20 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*2=10 5 5 5 5 5 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*1=5 5*3=15 5*3=15 5*2=10 5*5=25 5*3=15 5*5=25 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*5=25 5*5=25 5*5=25 5*4=20 5*4=20 5*2=10 5*4=20 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*2=10 5*2=10 5*3=15 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*1=5 5*3=15
60
Less Surface Roughness Changing Less Workpiece Damage Method Longevity Safety and Environment: Less Pollution Less Workers Risk Less Noise General: Low Cost Low Time Less Labor
4 4 4
4*5=20 4*5=20 4*4=16
4*5=20 4*5=20 4*4=16
4*2=8 4*3=12 4*4=16
4*5=20 4*5=20 4*5=20
4*2=8 4*3=12 4*3=12
4*3=12 4*4=16 4*4=16
4*4=16 4*4=16 4*4=16
4 5 3
4*5=20 5*4=20 3*3=9
4*5=20 5*4=20 3*3=9
4*3=12 5*3=15 3*3=9
4*4=16 5*4=20 3*3=9
4*4=16 5*4=20 3*3=9
4*3=12 5*4=20 3*3=9
4*3=12 5*3=15 3*3=9
5 5 5
5*4=20 5*4=20 5*4=20
5*4=20 5*4=20 5*4=20
5*4=20 5*4=20 5*4=20
5*3=15 5*4=20 5*4=20
5*4=20 5*3=15 5*3=15
5*3=15 5*3=15 5*4=20
5*4=20 5*4=20 5*4=20
Total Rating
388
489
579
649
472
523
458
Table 9: Selection matris
61
6. References
[1] D. Biermann1, M. Heilmann, 2008, Burr Minimization Strategies in Machining Operations, Technische Universitt Dortmund, Institute of Machining Technology, Baroper Str. 301, DE-44227 Dortmund, Germany [2] Aurich, J.C., 2006, SpanSauber, Untersuchung zur Beherrschung der Sauberkeit von zerspanend hergestellten Bauteilen, University of Kaiserslautern [3] L. Leitz, V. Franke, J.C. Aurich, 2006, Burr formation in drilling intersecting holes,University of Kaiserslautern, Institute for Manufacturing Technology and Production Systems, P.O. Box 3049, DE-67653 Kaiserslautern, Germany [4] http://www.webcitation.org/5nWaNTDGA [5] http://www.xebec-tech.co.jp/english/html/products/cf/cf_m.html [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crankshaft [7] http://www.volvocars.com/intl/top/about/corporate/volvosustainability/reports/pages/default.aspx [8] Burr formation in drilling intersecting holes, L. Leitz, V. Franke, J.C. Aurich University of Kaiserslautern, Institute for Manufacturing Technology and Production Systems, P.O. Box 3049, DE-67653 Kaiserslautern, Germany [9] Burr measurement system for drilled hole at inclined exit surface, H.P. Hoang, S.L. Ko Konkuk University, Department of Mechanical Design and Production Engineering, 1 Hwayang dong, Gwangjin gu, 143-701, Seoul, Korea [10] http://www.scania.com/investor-relations/company-overview/scania-fact-sheet/ [11] A Study on Deburring Inconel 718 Using Water Jet Technology, F. Boud1, J. Folkes1, N. Tantra1, S. Kannan2, I. W. Wright2, 1University of Nottingham, Department of Mechanical Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK [12] Cutting Forces and Wear in Dry Machining of Inconel 718 with coated carbide tools, D. Dudzinski, Received 26 July 2005 [13] Gillespie, Deburring and Edge Finishing Handbook, 1999 by Society of Manufacturing Engineers, 987654321 [14] Chern, G.L., 1993, Analysis of Burr Formation and Breakout in Metal Cutting, Ph.D. Thesis, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, 1993 [15] Hashimura, M., Hassamamontr, J., Dornfeld, D. A., 1999, Effect of In-plane Exit Angle and Rake Angles on Burr Height and Thickness in Face Milling Operation, Transactions of the ASME, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 121/1:13-19 [16] Burr Minimization Strategies in Machining Operations, D. Biermann1, M. Heilmann, Technische Universitt Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany [17] Dornfeld, D. and Lee, D., Precision Manufacturing, 2008, Springer, New York, p. 649. [18]A Review of Burr Formation in Machining, D. Dornfeld, S. Min 1University of California, Laboratory for Manufacturing and Sustainability, Mechanical Engineering Department, 94720-1740 Berkeley, California, USA [19] Chu, C.H. and Dornfeld, D.A., Geometric Approaches for Enhancing Edge Quality in Planar Milling, submitted for publication, ASME Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, 1999. [20] Degarmo, E. Paul; Black, J T.; Kohser, Ronald A. (2003), Materials and Processes in Manufacturing (9th ed.), Wiley, ISBN 0-471-65653-4. [21] Hashimura, M., Chang, Y. P., Dornfeld, D., Analysis of Burr Formation Mechanism in Orthogonal Cutting, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Volume 121, S.1-7, 1999. [22] Beier, H., Handbuch Entgrattechnik, Hanser, Mnchen, 1999, page 62.
62
[23] Berger, K., An Overview of Status and Trends in the Automotive Industry, 7th Intl Conf. on Deburring and Surface Finishing, University of California, Berkeley, June, 2004. [24] Schfer, F., 1975, Entgraten, Krausskopfverlag, Mainz. [25] Leopold, J., Schmidt, G., 2004, Methods of Burr Measurement and Burr Detection, VDIBerichte 1860:223-229 [26] Cooperstock, Fred I. General Relativistic Dynamics: Extending Einsteins Legacy Throughout the Universe. Page 12. World Scientific. 2009. ISBN 9789814271165 [27] ISAK CILIZ, PER TETZELL, MARTINA KROOK, KAISU VIRKAJRVI, Kvalitetsskrat arbetsstt vid montering, MG2027 Industriell produktion - Projektkurs Stockholm, Sverige VT 2009 [28] Sandvik Coromant, main catalog, 2010 [29] Investigation of Cryogenic Cooling Lubrication Effect on Machining System Operational Damping Ratio using Acoustic Signal, Peter KRAJNIK, Andreas ARCHENTI, Franci PUSAVEC, Janez KOPAC and Cornel Mihai NICOLESCU, 2009, Department of Production Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden.
63
Appendix 1*
(*) ISAK CILIZ, PER TETZELL, MARTINA KROOK, KAISU VIRKAJRVI, Kvalitetsskrat arbetsstt vid montering, MG2027 Industriell produktion - Projektkurs Stockholm, Sverige VT 2009 KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan
64
Appendix 2
65
66
Appendix 3
67
68
Appendix 4
69
70
Appendix 5
71
72
Appendix 6
73
74
Appendix 7
DECISION MATRIX/SELECTION MATRIX PROCEDURE A decision matrix is a chart that allows a team or an individual to systematically identify, analyze, and rate the strength of relationships between sets of information. The matrix is especially useful for looking at large numbers of decision factors and assessing each factors relative importance. A decision matrix is frequently used during quality planning activities to select product/service features and goals and to develop process steps and weigh alternatives. For quality improvement activities, a decision matrix can be useful in selecting a project, in evaluating alternative solutions to problems, and in designing remedies. The working steps are: 1) Identify alternatives. Depending upon the teams needs, these can be product/service features, process steps, projects, or potential solutions. List these across the top of the matrix. 2) Identify decision/selection criteria. These key criteria may come from a previously prepared affinity diagram or from a brainstorming activity. Make sure that everyone has a clear and common understanding of what the criteria mean. Also ensure that the criteria are written so that a high score for each criterion represents a favorable result and a low score represents an unfavorable result. List the criteria down the left side of the matrix. 3) Assign weights. If some decision criteria are more important than others, review and agree on appropriate weights to assign (e.g. 1, 2, 3). 4) Design a scoring system. Before rating the alternatives, the team must agree on a scoring system. Determine the scoring range (e.g., 1 to 5 or 1, 3, 5) and ensure that all team members have a common understanding of what a high, medium, and low score represents. 5) Rate the alternatives. For each alternative, assign a consensus rating for each decision criterion. The team may average the scores from individual team members, or may develop through a consensus-building activity. 6) Total the scores. Multiply the score for each decision criterion by its weighting factor. Then total the scores for each alternative being considered and analyze the results.
75

FULLTEXT01

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

FULLTEXT01

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

MASTERS THESIS IN PRODUCTION ENGINEERING

Supervisor Thomas Lundholm KTH DMMS September 2010

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Gteborg, September 2010

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

3. Survey of the current deburring problem ................................................ 17

3.1.5.1 3.1.5.2 3.1.5.3 3.1.5.4

Analysis and discussion ............................................................................................... 25

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3

3.2.3.1 3.2.3.2 3.2.3.3

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Deburring of main shaft in the transmission department at Scania ...................... 30

3.2.4.1 3.2.4.2 3.2.4.3 3.2.4.4

4. Experiments for new and improved deburring ....................................... 39

4.2.1 4.2.2 4.3

Cryogenic machining for burr reduction ............................................................................. 55

5. Conclusion.................................................................................................... 58 6. References .................................................................................................... 62

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

List of figures and pictures

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Figure 1: Typical burr and proposed measuring nomenclature [22]

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Figure 3: General milling burr classification [13]

Figure 4: Types of face milling burrs [15]

radius r and burr thickness b .

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Figure 5: Measurement values of a burr [24]

Figure 6: Methods of burr detection and measuring [25]

Figure 7: State of knowledge in burr formation [17]

Figure 8: Five level integration required for burr minimization [17]

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Outline of the thesis

Problem area ch1

Survey of the current deburring problem ch3

Sandvik Coromant ch3

Volvo Car ch3

Experiments on improved and new deburring methods ch4

Conclusion and discussion ch5

Figure 9: Schematic depiction of the outline of the thesis

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Data collection method

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

3. Survey of the current deburring problem

Figure 10: Sandviks industry sectors [www.sandvik.com]

Figure 11: Sandvik product types [28]

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Figure 12: Sandvik tool applications [28]

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Clamp Insert Shim screw Shim Shim screw hole Holder

Figure 14: Tool assembly process [27]

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

After tumbling deburring

After brushing deburring

After tumbling deburring

After brushing deburring

After tumbling deburring

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan

Current deburring methods

KTH | Kungliga Tekniska hgskolan