composite boring bar

© All Rights Reserved

27 tayangan

composite boring bar

© All Rights Reserved

- LATHE MACHINE PROJECT SEMESTER 2
- Repair_of_Impact-Damaged_Prestressed_Concrete.pdf
- Web 3070
- _ Recent Development of Seismic Retrofit Methods in Japan
- AA SM 111Composites WrinklingofFacingsinSandwichPanels
- Review on Use of FRP Composite System with RCC Beam and Column
- 5552
- Aprile 2007
- Irwin_rahman Frp Paper
- ansys
- Basics of Concrete Repair and Structural Strengthening
- Detail Lead Persons
- Materials Technology
- Sika Carbodur Plates
- Manufacturing Process 2 Jan 2014
- Composite Materials Applicationsxhapter1.pptx
- Lecture 1students
- Comparison of Double Unit Tunnel Form Building before and after Repair and Retrofit under in Plane Cyclic Loading
- Carbon Fiber Processing
- Design and Analysis of Leaf Spring of An

Anda di halaman 1dari 9

0 1997 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights resewed

Printed in Great Britain

0263-8223/97/$17.00 + 0.00

ELSEVIER

PII:SO263-8223(97)00089-S

Shuzo Nagano, Takayuki Koizumi, Toru Fujii, Nobutaka Tsujiuchi, Hiroki Ueda

& Kobe Steel

Doshisha University,Tanabe, Kyoto 610-03, Japan

only conventional steel bars but also cemented carbide bars, has recently

been developed. The main material of this composite bar is pitch-based

carbon fiber reinforced plastic. Carbon fibers aligned unidirectionally in the

longitudinal direction of the bars give high bending stiffness. Four types of

bar having different shaped steel cores were designed by FEM analysis and

produced for actual testing. A bar having a cross-shaped steel core shows

the best cutting capability and stability amongst all bars designed. This bar

can be used when the length (~5) and diameter (0) ratio L/D is 7 or even

at severe conditions while a cemented carbide bar cannot control the

chatter vibration even if the L/D is less than 6. Emphasis should be placed

on the fact that the cross-shaped steel core can increase the bending

stiffness of the bar in both tangential and radial directions by constraining

the shear deformation of the fiber layers without sacrificing the increase of

resonant frequencies. 0 1997 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

one must use materials which have a high stiff-

When cutting long holes into the internal sur- ness but low density. Carbon fiber reinforced

face of machine components, chattering plastics (CFRP) could meet such requirements

frequently occurs due to the low bending stiff- if high modulus fibers were to be used. Not only

ness and low damping ability of the boring bar high stiffness and high resonant frequencies, but

when the arm of the bar is long. Once the chat- also high damping can be expected because of

tering occurs, the roughness of the surface of the polymer matrix of CFRP [4].

the machine components becomes unacceptable The objective of the present work is to

to any standard, including the dimensional develop a new boring bar using CFRP which

accuracy, and the cutting edge is often broken. can be used at a wide range of L/D over 6. How

In the case of conventional steel boring bars, it to design the bar and its performance are dis-

becomes impractical to cut any metal compo- cussed and shown in this paper.

nents due to chattering when the ratio of bar

length L to bar diameter D (L/D) is larger than

4-5 [l]. Therefore, bars made of cemented car- DESIGN OF CFRP BORING BAR

bide are usually used when L/D is 4-6. When

L/D exceeds 5-6, specially devised boring bars Chattering

having anti-vibration mechanisms are some-

times required [2,3]. However, these are Vibration during operation is classified as

expensive. forced vibration and self excited vibration.

Chattering during cutting occurs as self Chattering of boring bars during internal

excited vibration. According to the chattering cutting is due to the self excited vibrations

theories based on the l-DOF vibration system, having a regenerative feedback, generally called

the bending stiffness and resonant frequencies regenerative chattering. In practice, boring bars

of boring bars govern chattering as well as the are designed to be stable against regenerative

damping ability of the bars. In order to increase chattering. Figure 1 shows the regenerative

531

532 S. fVugun0 et al.

Horizontal

Workpiece

/-

Regenerative effect

i- Tool

Fig. 3. Conceptional illustration of the regenerative effect.

Fig. 1. Merritts model.

chattering model based on the l-DOF vibration cutting force F is a function of u(t) and is given

system gived by Merritt [5]. Considering outer as

cutting in this model, the short tool is fixed

while the workpiece is sustained by a spring and F(t) = k,(u)t (2)

a damper. For inner hole cutting using a boring

bar, a workpiece is large enough to be fixed where k, is a cutting stiffness varying according

while the bar should be represented by a mass- to cutting conditions such as workpiece

spring-damper combination as shown in Fig. 2. material, cutting speed, feed and stiffiness of

In the figure, F, is the cutting force acting in the lathe. Based on the l-DOF system shown in

the tangential direction. Due to this force, the Fig. 2 the governing equation for a boring bar is

bar is bent in the vertical plane. FH is the radial given by

force acting in the radial direction of the hole

(radial force is known as shear force in outer F( t ) = mji( t)+cj( t)+ky( t) (3)

cutting). This force causes the bar to bend in

the horizontal plane. Figure 3 illustrates how where m is an equivalent mass of the boring

the regenerative effect due to former cutting bar, c and k are an equivalent damping coeffi-

traces occurs. cient and an equivalent stiffness of the bar,

Actual cutting depth u(t) at time t is defined respectively. By solving eqn (3) in conjunction

as with eqns (1) and (2), it is obvious that high

n equivalent stiffness and damping ability give

u(t) = uo- y(t)+py(t - (1)

high chattering stability to boring bars.

where ug is the initial cutting depth: y is the It is known that the frequency of chattering is

displacement of the cutting edge in the direc- almost equal to the first resonant frequency of a

tion of the radial force: p is all overlap ratio of boring bar. From eqn (4), if the maximum

the cutting edge determined by cutting edge acceleration of a cutting edge, a, is constant, the

shape, cutting depth and feed: i_~governs the displacement of the cutting edge 6 decreases

magnitude of the regenerative effect; T is a with increasing chattering frequency f

periodic time for the workpiece revolution. The

Boring-Bar

Equation (5) shows the well-known relation-

ship betweenf, m and k

Fig. 2. Modified model. weight bars have the advantage of stability

Development of a composite boring bar 533

most attractive materials for a boring bar.

Carbon fibers

k, high damping c and small equivalent mass m 4 Cuttinghead steel

give a high stability of the bar for regenerative 3 Adhession mw

chattering of the system. These qualities are 2 Adapter Steel-.

also preferable for anti-chattering. Therefore, 1 Rod CFRP

high stiffiness and light weight CFRP is an Stnl Abptor md CFRP rod are assembled

attractive material for boring bars. Today, by adhesstve and cutting head la scmwed

on rdaptor.

graphite/epoxy composites are widely applied

Fig. 4. Total assembly of the CFRP boring bars.

not only on aero or astronomic structures but

also general products such as sports goods. For

such applications, virtually only pan-based fibers shows the schematic view of the CFRP boring

are used. The cost of these fibers is reasonable bars manufactured by way of trial. The adapter

but the Youngs moduli of such fibers are not whose inner hole was tapered, was bonded to

enough to give bars enough bending stiffness as the bar using an epoxy adhesive. The commer-

compared to conventional steel bars. The cially available cutting head is fixed to this

Youngs modulus of CFRP applied to boring adapter using three bolts. When the CFRP bor-

bars must he higher than 200 GPa (the Youngs ing bars are fixed to a lathe, a specially devised

modulus of steel). The longitudinal Youngs bar holder is used because the bars cannot be

modulus EL of CFRP can be estimated by the subjected to concentrated loads given by

law of mixtures as follows when fibers are standard fastening bolts. For sufficient fixing of

aligned unidirectionally. boring bars made from unidirectional CFRP,

four types of different shapes of steel core were

E, = E,V,+E,( 1 - V,) = E,V, (6) considered.

where EF and E, are the Youngs moduli of the

fibers and the matrix, respectively; V, is a fiber Type p

volume content. Usually, E,,, is much lower than In the case of a Type P boring bar, a steel pipe

EF and V, is higher than 50%. Therefore was used as the center core of the bar (as

E,(l - V,) in the above equation is negligible. shown in Fig. 5(a)) since lubricant is often used

According to eqn (6), E, must be higher than during the cutting operation. The outer diam-

400 GPa which implies the same stiffness as eter of the pipe is 15 mm while inner diameter

steel bars. Pitch-based carbon fiber, whose is 8 mm. This steel pipe core is also useful to

Youngs modulus is higher than 700 GPa is now give an accurate diameter of the bar by machin-

commercially available. Considering the varia- ing after fabricating the bar in an auto clave

tion of material data, pitch-based carbon fibers using unidirectional prepreg.

which has a nominal Youngs modulus of The effect of shear deformation is appreci-

700 GPa was adopted for the prototypes of able when the cantilever beam bar is relatively

CFRI boring bars. The average fiber volume short since the shear modulus of CFRP is over

content was about 55% and the observed 100 times lower than the longitudinal modulus

Youngs modulus of CFRP was 300-350 GPa. of CFRP. It is expected that this small center

core cannot restrict shear deformation due to

Construction of boring bars the cutting and radial forces.

considering fabrication and the standard tool In order to improve the bending stiffness, addi-

size. As the cutting head, which holds a cutting tional deformation due to shear deformation of

tip, cannot be attached directly to the CFRP CFRP layers should be reduced. For such a

bar, a steel adapter was developed. Figure 4 requirement, different types of steel core were

534 S. Nuguno et al.

considered. Near the neutral axis of a beam, the cal plane. The vertical plate is effective for the

shear stress becomes high when the beam is shear deformation due to cutting force.

subjected to not only a bending moment but

also a shear force. Therefore, if a material with

Type H

a high shear rigidity is used as the center plate Type H CFRP composite boring bar has a

core of the composite bar, the total deflection 2 mm center plate core horizontally embedded.

of the bar can be reduced. Figure 5(b) shows a The horizontal plate is effective for shear defor-

Type V CFRP composite boring bar with a mation due to the radial force. Usually, the

2 mm center plate core embedded in the verti- radial force is smaller than the cutting force.

Figure 5(c) shows Type H bar. This bar is made

by rotating the Type V bar on its longitudinal

CFRP axis by 90.

unidirectional shear deformation. However, two

plates should be used in both directions as the

core of a composite bar if both forces are rela-

/ tively large. For such a case, a cross-shaped

(a) Type P steel core as shown in Fig. S(d) must be effect-

ive even if the total weight of the bar is

&FRP sacrificed to some extent.

FEM ANALYSIS

quency of all types of CFRP boring bars were

/Steel core calculated by FEM analysis using SDRC

l-DEAS.

(b) Typev For a Type C boring bar, the stiffness is esti-

mated when the thickness of the steel core

CFRP varies. Figure 6 shows FE divisions for all bor-

ing bars. Both steel and cemented carbide

boring bars are also analyzed using the same FE

division of Type C. Solid elements having eight

nodes were used. Each node has three degrees

of translation. The material data for calculation

for composite bars are given in Table 1. These

/ Steel core values were estimated by material test. Bound-

(~1 Type H ary conditions of the FE model is shown in

Fig. 7. The overhang of the boring bars is

CFRP 224 mm and the diameter of the bars is 32 mm

(L/D = 7). All degrees of freedom of the sur-

face nodes contacting the internal surface of the

boring bar holder are constrained, as shown by

the gray area in Fig. 7.

Bending stiffness

Fig. 5. Constructions of CFRP boring bars. (a) Type P. (b) calculated by concentrating a force on the node

Type V. (c) Type H. (d) Type C. located at the free edge of the boring bar when

Development of a composite boring bar 535

(a) Type P CFFLP boring bar (b) Type V CFRP boring bar

0.80 I

01234 5670

Thickness of the steel part of

the CFRP boring bars, mm

Pig. 8. Relationship between the thickness of the steel

core of the CFRP boring bars and bending stiffness (Ll

D = 7).

(c) TypeH CFRP boring bar (d) TypeC CFRP boring bar D = 7. The variation of bending stiffness with

Pig. 6. FE divisions of CFRP boring bars. (a) Type P respect to core thickness is also given for a

CFRP boring bar. (b) Type V CFRP boring bar. (c) Type Type C boring bar. The ordinate is normalized

H CFRP boring bar. (d) Type C CFRP boring bar. by that of the steel boring bar.

If a whole bar is made of CFRP instead of

set-up as a cantilever beam in the vertical direc- steel, the tensile stiffness or bending stiffness

tion. under a pure bending moment would be 160%

Figure 8 shows a comparison of bending stiff- (320 GPa) higher than those of steel. However,

ness in the direction of cutting force among the bending stiffness under both bending

moment and shear force becomes 87% of that

lhble 1. Material properties of the CFRP used in FEM

for the steel boring bar. Use of CFRP does not

analysis

always increase the bending stiffness of canti-

Youngs modulus EX EZ

E, lever beam bars. The reason of this low stiffness

@Pa)

was explained in the above section. From Fig. 8,

6.85 6.85 320 even a 1 mm thick cross-shaped steel core is

Shearing modulus GYZ GLX effective to constrain shear deformation. Up to

@Pa) 6 mm, the bending stiffness of the composite

0.533 2.54 2.54 bar increases with increasing thickness. Shear

Poisson ratio % YYZ V7X

deformation is much constrained with increas-

0.23 0.004 0.004

ing thickness of the steel core, but a thicker

core also reduces the bending stiffness more,

due to the low Youngs modulus of steel. The

maximum increase in bending stiffness is

around 20% using CFRP. The Type H com-

bination has a lower bending stiffness than that

of the steel bar since the steel plate core does

not constrain the shear deformation of CFRP

layers in the Y-Z plane. For a Type P boring

bar, the bending stiffness is only 4% as high as

that of the steel bar. The difference in bending

stiffness between a Type P bar and steel

becomes less with a decrease of L/D.Finally,

224 140 the bending stiffness for a Type P bar becomes

420

lower than that of the steel bar. The Type V bar

has a similar stiffness to Type C bar since the

Fig. 7. Boundary conditions of the FEM models. core plate vertically aligned is effective in con-

536 S. Nugunoet al.

straining shear deformation of CFRP layers in for bending stiffness, the maximum gain is

the Y-Z plane. On the other hand, the cemen- obtained at 6-7 mm. In the present study, the

ted carbide boring bar has a bending stiffness thickness of all steel plate cores is 2 mm as it is

2.37 times higher than that of the steel boring expected that the resonant frequency is effective

bar. One resolution to improve the bending for the chattering stability.

stiffness is to use carbon fibers with a higher

Youngs modulus. Although some fibers have

Youngs modulus higher than 1000 GPa, they CUTTING EXPERIMENTS

are not yet commercially available.

Cutting experiments were conducted to evaluate

Resonant frequency cutting performance and stability against chat-

tering for CFRP bars (Type P, Type V, Type C,

Modal analysis of the models was also con- Type H and Type C) as well as conventional

ducted to estimate the first resonant frequencies steel and cemented carbide bars. The diameter

of the bars (bending mode I). In Fig. 9, a com- of all bars is 32 mm. A conventional lathe (not

parison of the first resonant frequency for a NC lathe) was used for the tests. Here, all

CFRP, steel and cemented carbide bars at Ll boring bars were fixed using the specially

D = 7 is given. The variation of the first devised bar holder to provide equal conditions

resonant frequency with respect to core thick- of holding in the tool fixture as shown in

ness is also given for the Type C boring bar. Fig. 10. An overhang of 224 mm gives an L/

The ordinate is normalized by that of the steel D = 7. Thick cylindrical pipes (inner diameter:

boring bar as well as in Fig. 9. 60 mm, outer diameter: 100 mm) whose

In contrast to bending stiffness, the resonant material was mild steel were used as a work-

frequencies of CFRP boring bars are always piece for the tests. Before the cutting

higher than that for the steel bar. They are also experiment, the surface of the workpiece was

comparable to the resonant frequency of the smoothed to give a constant testing condition.

cemented carbide bar because the composite Two tiny accelerometers were attached on the

bars are one third to one quarter lighter than cutting head near the cutting edge to measure

the steel bar. The cemented carbide bar has a accelerations in the tangential and radial direc-

higher bending stiffness but it is extremely tions during the cutting operation. Cutting

heavy. From a viewpoint of resonant frequen- conditions are given in Table 2.

cies, high performance of CFRP boring bar can As noise occurs and chatter marks can be

be expected. It is obvious that the first resonant distinguished on the cutting surface of the

frequency increases once with increasing in workpiece when chattering occurs, it is easy to

thickness and then it decreases from the Type C identify whether chattering has occurred or not.

bar result. The maximum increase in resonant

frequency is about 30% at 2 mm thickness while

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

a feed-cutting depth map (Fig. 11) at L/D = 7.

Type P boring bar

Workpiece Screw of

t Boring bar

E 1.10 -

T tooi post

holder

E

Steel boring bar \ .\

s 1.00

s! Boring bar

jJ 0.90 /

ii 0 1 234 56 70

Thickness of the steel part of

the CFRP boring bars, mm

Fig. 9. Relationship between the thickness of the steel

core of the CFRP boring bars and first resonant frequency

(LID = 7). Fig. 10. System for cutting test.

Development of a composite boring bar 537

Table 2. Cutting conditions in the measurement that the bending stiffness in the radial force

Revolution Cutting Feed direction is also as important as the bending

(rpm) depth (mm/rev) stiffness in the cutting force direction.

(mm) Figures 12 and 13 show the dynamic response

630 0.4 0.3 for Type C CFRP and steel bars during cutting

0.2 :*:

operation. Parts (a) are the acceleration-time

0:2 history plots, parts (b) are the power spectra for

500 0.4 0.3 trace (a) and parts (c) are the Lissajious plots

0.2

of acceleration in X and Y directions. It must be

0.2

::: noted that the surface of the workpiece cut by

the steel boring bar was extremely rough and

chattering occurred. Even for the Type C bar,

oscillation occurred but the magnitude of oscil-

As before mentioned, the steel bar was not able

lation is much smaller than that for the steel

to cut without chattering when the L/D value bar. The period of the main oscillation corre-

was greater than 4. Even when L/D was smaller sponds to the first resonant frequency for both

than 4, it was difficult for the steel bar to cut cases.

without chattering under several conditions. No Here, the maximum acceleration of Type C

marks in the figure mean that smooth cutting and steel bars are 11 and 280 G and the fre-

without chattering was not attained for the quency of oscillation for the bars are 500 and

corresponding bars. Therefore, a mark for the 375 Hz, respectively. Maximum displacement of

steel bar cannot be found in this figure. It is the cutting edge of the Type C and steel bars

found that the Type C CFRP bar has excellent are calculated as 0.011 and 0.43 mm, respec-

performance. Although the cemented carbide tively, from eqn (4). It is found that the

sometimes attained smooth cutting at lighter machined surface cut by the Type C bar is

conditions than those for the Type C bar, even acceptable for the roughness and dimensional

at L/D = 7, it was not always stable. Once chat- accuracy. However, it is realized that the maxi-

tering occurred, it did not stop for the mum displacement of the cutting edge of the

cemented carbide bar while the Type C CFRP steel bar is larger than cutting depth and the

bar was always stable. Good stability and cutting edge was beating the surface of the

cutting performance could not be obtained for workpiece. In this point, the advantage for chat-

both Types V and H bars. In particular, the tering stability of the Type C bar is obvious.

Type V bar shows a high bending stiffness Although the Type C bar has a high cutting

almost equal to the Type C bar and the first ability and chattering stability as above, it has

resonant frequency is higher than that of the no problem entirely. From Fig. 12(b) and

Type C bar in the cutting force direction. How- Fig. 13(b), the resonant frequency for the Type

ever, the bending stiffness of the Type V bar in C bar is higher than that for the steel bar. How-

the radial force direction is equal to the bend- ever, an increase of the resonant frequency is

ing stiffness of the Type H bar and it is much not remarkable, as expected in Fig. 9. No

lower than that of the Type C bar. It is shown apparent reasons could be found for this dis-

crepancy. Holding CFRP boring bars tightly is a

problem and this could be one of reasons for

0.8 the above discrepancy. The method for holding

0 Type C boring bar

rD Type V boring bar

the bar must be considered in the near future as

E 0.6 well as how to attach the cutting head to the

9 Type H boring bar

S-

8 0.4 0 Type P boring bar bar. Surface protection for lubricant and tips is

e Cemented carbide

boring bar

also one of issues to be considered for practical

.-@ 0 Steel boring bar use.

2 0.2

CONCLUSIONS

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Nomarkmeans

impossible to cutting

Feed, mm/rev 1. A boring bar made from unidirectional

Fig. 11. Cutting limit of the boring bars. CFRP which has a high stability against chat-

538 S. Nuguno et al.

was successfully developed.

2. The cross-shaped steel core embedded

CFRP boring bar can constrain shear defor-

mation and improves the equivalent bending

stiffness of the boring bar.

3. An optimized cross-shaped steel core

improves the dynamic characteristics of the

total structure of the boring bar.

4. Compared with the cemented carbide boring

bar, chattering can be completely suppressed,

even in the range of L/D ratios greater than

7.

-20 I I

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time, ms

12

10

-ml I

0 20 40 60 60 100

Time,ms

300 ,

250

0 _..J L u 200

0 500 1000 1500 2000

.g 150

Frequency, Hz %

h

100

(b) Power spectrum for (a) 4

50

Frequency.Hz

15

(b) Power spectrum for (a)

10

4001

0

s 5

E 200

E O (3

s

s

8 -!j E

!! 0

s!

a -10

3

-15 4 -200

-20

-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

-200 0 200 400

Acceleration, G Acceleration, G

Fig. 12. Dynamic response for the Type C CFRP boring Fig. 13. Dynamic response for the steel boring bar

bar (630 rpm, cutting depth = 0.4 mm, feed = 0.3 mm/rev): (630 rpm, cutting depth = 0.4 mm, feed = 0.3 mm/rev): (a)

(a) acceleration-time history, (b) power spectrum for (a), acceleration-time history, (b) power spectrum for (a), (c)

(c) Lissajious plot of acceleration in X and Y directions. Lissajious plot of acceleration in X and Y directions.

Development of a composite boring bar 539

engng, SO(5) (1984) 860.

1. Hoshi, T., Vibration ana&is of mechanical cutting, 4. Kitajima, K. et al., J. Japan Sot. precision engng, 53(10)

Kegyo Chasakai Publishing Co. Ltd, 1990. (1987) 1582.

2. Takeyama, H. et al., J. Japan Sot. precision engng, 5. Merritt, H. E. Trans. ASME, Ser: B, 87(4) (1965) 27.

48(12) (1982) 1628.

- LATHE MACHINE PROJECT SEMESTER 2Diunggah olehYe Chonn
- Repair_of_Impact-Damaged_Prestressed_Concrete.pdfDiunggah oleheltopo2
- Web 3070Diunggah olehdraganug
- _ Recent Development of Seismic Retrofit Methods in JapanDiunggah olehReivax50
- AA SM 111Composites WrinklingofFacingsinSandwichPanelsDiunggah olehjowar
- Review on Use of FRP Composite System with RCC Beam and ColumnDiunggah olehIJSTE
- 5552Diunggah olehKaren Robinson
- Aprile 2007Diunggah oleh010
- Irwin_rahman Frp PaperDiunggah olehSal Saad
- ansysDiunggah olehnanduslns07
- Basics of Concrete Repair and Structural StrengtheningDiunggah olehPaul Wyom Zakka
- Detail Lead PersonsDiunggah olehEngr Nayyer Nayyab Malik
- Materials TechnologyDiunggah olehBrian Huang
- Sika Carbodur PlatesDiunggah olehthepilot2
- Manufacturing Process 2 Jan 2014Diunggah olehPrasad C M
- Composite Materials Applicationsxhapter1.pptxDiunggah olehgren900
- Lecture 1studentsDiunggah olehNoPiNG34
- Comparison of Double Unit Tunnel Form Building before and after Repair and Retrofit under in Plane Cyclic LoadingDiunggah olehElvina Sara Sucre Bueno
- Carbon Fiber ProcessingDiunggah olehaswin8bojongmania
- Design and Analysis of Leaf Spring of AnDiunggah olehrajesh kumar
- BB3000 Line Boring MachineDiunggah olehadnya
- Swing Check ValveDiunggah olehmahalakshmi
- Centurion-7-CNC-Programming-Manual-10208-Ru-en.pdfDiunggah olehoutdesing
- hcb 2.pdfDiunggah olehsibikesav
- accp6ACI2009Diunggah olehMat Gai
- Made easyDiunggah olehpunky
- ProductionDiunggah olehRevathy Vijayan
- RW DesignDiunggah olehEwan
- Composite Final PptDiunggah olehSiddharth Kumar Maurya
- Magnetoviscoelasticity Parametric Model of an MR Elastomer Vibration Mitigation DeviceDiunggah olehUmanath R Poojary R

- Resonant ControllersDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- BFRPDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- Thesis WalidDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- Tool Wear DAMPERDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- art%3A10.1186%2F2196-1166-1-3.pdfDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- 1-s2.0-S1644966513001453-mainDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- 1-s2.0-S0307904X13006732-mainDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- MillingDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- Non Linear AbsorberDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- Chatter SuppersionDiunggah olehssm_ssm
- Making Transient LoadDiunggah olehsaifudin-its
- ED651_SET1Diunggah olehssm_ssm

- 1-s2.0-S1877705813018973-mainDiunggah olehErkanAksoylu
- Deflection Limits for Tilt-Up Wall Serviceability - The History BDiunggah olehRajesh Gopalakrishnan
- NS22-1cncrtdesign_3Diunggah olehuserhie
- FootingsDiunggah olehChowdhury Priodeep
- 11_Section 5.6_Flexure(E).PDFDiunggah olehsourabh mahana
- Span-Depth Ratios for One-Way Members Based OnDiunggah olehtrabajosic
- Structural A36 Steel Wide Flange I Beam Section Properties Table Sizes W14 to W25 - Engineers EdgeDiunggah olehjmartinezmo
- Additional Calculation for Folding DoorDiunggah olehNoman Ali
- Experimental Study on Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete Moderate Deep BeamDiunggah olehBahaa Hussain
- Deflections of Profiled Deck and Allowance in DesignDiunggah olehmdavies20
- steel-frame-constructionDiunggah olehapi-386384775
- 05 Chapter 6_Mat FoundationsDiunggah olehSabrina Imloul
- Third Sem Uit CivilDiunggah olehDanish Khan
- SHAH&HMADDiunggah olehHuda Jawad
- ComFlor9-HelpFileDiunggah olehJustin Musopole
- Shear Capacity of Steel Plate Girders With Large Web OpeningsDiunggah olehPauloAndresSepulveda
- HSBC.pdfDiunggah olehAdnanAnb
- CE6306-Strength of MaterialsDiunggah olehMohammedRaffic
- UPRR OregonDiunggah olehazshah
- Gis&Cad Lab ManualDiunggah olehmahesh
- Radtech Man (Fibre Rebar)Diunggah olehpete0980
- A Simple Compliance Modeling Method for Flexure HingesDiunggah olehBrian Freeman
- 9a01301-Mechanics of SolidsDiunggah olehsivabharathamurthy
- Fracture energy of full scale and half scale masonry bricks.pdfDiunggah olehAbba-Gana Mohammed
- 2A Short Span Steel Brs H SeradjDiunggah olehJosue Lewandowski
- Perm Beam SpecDiunggah olehpeejay
- Camber Calculation.pdfDiunggah olehsoroware
- SAPv19-CFD-ACI-318-14Diunggah olehToc Hu Kwu
- ijmaerv5n1spl_26Diunggah olehDaniel Navarro
- SFD & BMD LecturerDiunggah olehTshepiso Nthite