Abstract
The honing tool is often assumed to have an ideal behaviour, meaning that there is no difference between the forces or positions measured at the honing spindle and those measured directly at the honing tool. In reality the normal force at the honing stone is influenced by the behaviour of the honing tool: a tangential tolerance at the honing stone can enable a yawing of the stone. Friction between the tool components influences the forces at the tool and can lead to self-locking. Also the outer diameter of the honing tool can be influenced by several perturbations: elastic deformation of the tool can cause a difference between the feeding position at the honing spindle and at the honing stone. Axial tolerance at the honing stone can make the feeding position dependent on the direction and value of the axial stroke velocity. Varying feeding positions of the honing stone influence the process forces and consequently the material removal mechanism during the honing process. In this paper an analytical model of the honing tool will be used to investigate and estimate the real tool behaviour. The model uses geometric and algebraic methods to estimate the state, forces and lengths during the honing process. Two different tools from the industrial application will be used as an example to show the impacts on the process forces.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- \(\Delta d\) :
-
Material allowance of the workpiece
- \(\Delta s_a\) :
-
Axial tolerance of the honing stone in the tool body
- \(\Delta s_k\) :
-
Deformation of the feeding cone
- \(\Delta s_r\) :
-
Deformation of the tool body
- \(\Delta s_{f,d}\) :
-
Diametrical feed per step
- \(\Delta t_f\) :
-
Time between the feeding steps
- \(\gamma\) :
-
Cone angle of the honing tool
- \(\mu _{h}\) :
-
Friction coefficient between honing stone and workpiece
- \(\mu _{steel}\) :
-
Friction coefficient steel-steel
- \(\psi\) :
-
Yawing angle of the honing stone in the tool
- \(b_{H}\) :
-
Width of the honing stone
- \(c_{1L}\) :
-
Equivalent spring constant for a single stone tool
- \(c_{K}\) :
-
Spring constant of the feeding cone
- \(c_{ML}\) :
-
Equivalent spring constant for a multi stone tool
- \(c_{R}\) :
-
Spring constant of the tool body
- \(c_{WZ}\) :
-
Spring constant of the spring on top of the tool
- d :
-
Diameter of the bore after honing
- \(F_{ap,n}\) :
-
Normal contact force between honing stone and feeding cone
- \(F_{ap,t}\) :
-
Tangential contact force between honing stone and feeding cone
- \(F_{a}\) :
-
Contact force between honing stone and tool body
- \(F_{b}\) :
-
Contact force between honing stone and tool body
- \(F_{c,t}\) :
-
Tangential cutting force between honing stone and workpiece
- \(F_{f,wz}\) :
-
Axial feeding force at the top side of the tool
- \(F_{k}\) :
-
Axial feeding force at the cone
- \(F_{n}\) :
-
Normal force between honing stone and workpiece
- \(F_{WZ,0}\) :
-
Preload of the spring between feeding cone and tool body
- \(F_{wz,n}\) :
-
Force between tool body and honing stone
- \(l_{ap,n}\) :
-
Vertical distance between the contact point of \(F_a\) and \(F_{ap,n}\)
- \(l_{ap,t}\) :
-
Horizontal distance between \(F_a\) and \(F_{ap,t}\)
- \(l_{c,t}\) :
-
Horizontal distance between \(F_{c,t}\) and \(F_a\)
- \(l_{Fb}\) :
-
Horizontal distance between \(F_a\) and \(F_b\)
- M :
-
Torque around the tool axis
- m :
-
Number of honing stones in the tool
- n :
-
Rotation speed of the tool
- \(s_{f,a}\) :
-
Axial position of the feeding cone
- \(s_{f,d}\) :
-
Diametrical feeding position of the honing stone
- \(s_{f,r}\) :
-
Radial feeding position of the honing stone
- \(s_{f,wz}\) :
-
Axial feeding position at the top side of the tool
- z(t):
-
Axial stroke position of the honing stone
- \(\dot{z}(t)\) :
-
Axial stroke velocity of the honing stone
- \(\dot{z}_{max}\) :
-
Maximal axial stroke velocity of the honing stone
- \(\ddot{z}(t)\) :
-
Axial stroke acceleration of the honing stone
References
Saljé E, Paulmann R (1988) Relations between abrasive processes. Ann CIRP 37(2):641–648
Vrac D, Sidjanin L, Kovac P, Balos S (2012) The influence of honing process parameters on surface quality, productivity, cutting angle and coefficients of friction. Ind Lubr Tribol 64(2):77–83. doi:10.1108/00368791211208679
Buj-Corral I, Vivancos-Calvet J, Coba-Salcedo M (2014) Modelling of surface finish and material removal rate in rough honing. Precis Eng 38:100–108. doi:10.1016/0j.precisioneng.2013.07.009
Moos U, Bähre D (2015) Analysis of process forces for the precision honing of small bores. 15th CIRP conference on modelling of machining operations. Procedia CIRP 31C, pp 381–386. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2015.03.066
Bähre D, Schmitt C, Moos U (2012) Comparison of different approaches to force controlled precision honing of bores. In: Proceedings of NAMRI/SME, vol 40
Flores G (1992) Basic principles and applications of honing (translation of the German title: Grundlagen und Anwendungen des Honens). Vulkan-Verlag, Essen
Zettel H-D (1974) Enhancement of stock removal and improvement of form at long stroke honing (translation of the German title: Abtragssteigerung und Formverbesserung beim Langhubhonen). Ph.D. thesis. Fakultät für Maschinenbau der Universität Karlsruhe (TH)
Saljé E, Von See M (1987) Process-optimizations in honing. Ann CIRP 36(1):235–239
Cloutier D, Hoth P, Jacobsmeyer R (1998) Honing feed system having full control of feed force, rate, and position and method of operation of the same. United States Patent US007371149B2
Biemann D, Marschalkowski K, Paffrath K-U (2010) Development of a honing process for the combination machining of hardened axisymmetric parts. Prod Eng 4(2–3):147–155
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the KADIA Produktion GmbH+Co., Nürtingen, Germany, for the provision of their honing machine and for supporting and funding the investigations.
