Chunlin Miao, John C. Lambropoulos, and Stephen D. Jacobs, "Process parameter effects on material removal in magnetorheological finishing of borosilicate glass," Appl. Opt. 49, 1951-1963 (2010)
We investigate the effects of processing parameters on material removal for borosilicate glass. Data are collected on a magnetorheological finishing (MRF) spot taking machine (STM) with a standard aqueous magnetorheological (MR) fluid. Normal and shear forces are measured simultaneously, in situ, with a dynamic dual load cell. Shear stress is found to be independent of nanodiamond concentration, penetration depth, magnetic field strength, and the relative velocity between the part and the rotating MR fluid ribbon. Shear stress, determined primarily by the material mechanical properties, dominates removal in MRF. The addition of nanodiamond abrasives greatly enhances the material removal efficiency, with the removal rate saturating at a high abrasive concentration. The volumetric removal rate (VRR) increases with penetration depth but is insensitive to magnetic field strength. The VRR is strongly correlated with the relative velocity between the ribbon and the part, as expected by the Preston equation. A modified removal rate model for MRF offers a better estimation of MRF removal capability by including nanodiamond concentration and penetration depth.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
Numbers in italics indicate the specific value of each setting when it varied, while all other parameters were held constant.
Magnet currents 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5, and correspond to a measured magnetic field strength of 1.55, 1.88, 2.20, 2.49, and at a location above the apex of the wheel. See Ref. [13] for details about the magnetic field strength measurement.
Wheel speeds 150, 175, 200, 225, and correspond to a velocity of 1.18, 1.37, 1.57, 1.77, and .
Table 2
Experimental Data for Various Nanodiamond Concentrations and Spot Taking Machine Operating Settings
Varying Condition
Spot Time (s)
ddp ()
Spot Area ()
Spot Volume ()
Shear Stress, τ (MPa)
Pressure, p (MPa)
PRR ()
VRR ()
Nanodiamond Concentration ()
0.000
5.22
0.025
2.16
0.050
1.17
0.075
1.17
0.100
1.17
Penetration Depth ()
0.1
1.17
0.2
1.17
0.3
1.17
0.4
1.17
0.5
1.17
Magnet Current (A)
10
1.17
12.5
1.17
15
1.17
17.5
1.17
20
1.17
Wheel Speed ()
150
1.17
175
1.17
200
1.17
225
1.17
250
1.17
Table 3
Magnetorheological Fluid Ribbon Width at Various Magnetic Field Strengthsa
The MR fluid used in the current work is the standard aqueous MR, which is different from the fluid used in the Schinhaerl work [3]. This contributes to the difference in ribbon width. However, the ribbon width obtained from the current work and that of Schinhaerl show the same trend as a function of magnetic field strength.
Estimated as described in Ref. [15].
Tables (3)
Table 1
Magnetorheological Fluid Condition and Spot Taking Machine Settings for All Experimentsa
Numbers in italics indicate the specific value of each setting when it varied, while all other parameters were held constant.
Magnet currents 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5, and correspond to a measured magnetic field strength of 1.55, 1.88, 2.20, 2.49, and at a location above the apex of the wheel. See Ref. [13] for details about the magnetic field strength measurement.
Wheel speeds 150, 175, 200, 225, and correspond to a velocity of 1.18, 1.37, 1.57, 1.77, and .
Table 2
Experimental Data for Various Nanodiamond Concentrations and Spot Taking Machine Operating Settings
Varying Condition
Spot Time (s)
ddp ()
Spot Area ()
Spot Volume ()
Shear Stress, τ (MPa)
Pressure, p (MPa)
PRR ()
VRR ()
Nanodiamond Concentration ()
0.000
5.22
0.025
2.16
0.050
1.17
0.075
1.17
0.100
1.17
Penetration Depth ()
0.1
1.17
0.2
1.17
0.3
1.17
0.4
1.17
0.5
1.17
Magnet Current (A)
10
1.17
12.5
1.17
15
1.17
17.5
1.17
20
1.17
Wheel Speed ()
150
1.17
175
1.17
200
1.17
225
1.17
250
1.17
Table 3
Magnetorheological Fluid Ribbon Width at Various Magnetic Field Strengthsa
The MR fluid used in the current work is the standard aqueous MR, which is different from the fluid used in the Schinhaerl work [3]. This contributes to the difference in ribbon width. However, the ribbon width obtained from the current work and that of Schinhaerl show the same trend as a function of magnetic field strength.
Estimated as described in Ref. [15].