Research on the effect of grinding force on the axial ultrasonic vibration-assisted grinding of Ti-6Al-4V with multi-grain conical grinding head

Abstract

A multi-grain conical grinding head capable of performing both peripheral and end-face grinding was created in Abaqus to simulate conventional grinding (CG) and axial ultrasonic-assisted vibration grinding (AUVAG) on Ti-6Al-4V alloy. A comparative analysis was conducted to examine the effects of key grinding parameters on the fluctuation amplitude and mean value of grinding forces in CG and AUVAG. The mechanism of ultrasonic vibration’s influence on grinding forces was analyzed, and a theoretical model for normal and tangential grinding forces in peripheral grinding of Ti-6Al-4V was established. Additionally, the surface morphology of CG and AUVAG was analyzed. The study found that the fluctuation amplitude of grinding forces in both AUVAG and CG increases with the axial grinding depth, feed rate, ultrasonic amplitude, and ultrasonic frequency, while it decreases with increasing spindle speed. However, the fluctuation amplitude in AUVAG is greater than that in CG. The average grinding forces in both CG and AUVAG increase with the grinding depth and feed rate, and decrease with the spindle speed. Compared to CG, the mean F _x ( $\overline{F_x}$ ) and F _y ( $\overline{F_y}$ ) are lower in AUVAG, while the mean F _z ( $\overline{F_z}$ ) is higher. Under different axial grinding depths, the maximum reduction in $\overline{F_x}$ and $\overline{F_y}$ for AUVAG is 4.70% and 5.18%, respectively, while the maximum increase in $\overline{F_z}$ is 77.48%. At different feed rates, the maximum reduction in $\overline{F_x}$ and $\overline{F_y}$ for AUVAG is 3.02% and 21.01%, respectively, while the maximum increase in $\overline{F_z}$ is 81.67%. Under different spindle speeds, the maximum reduction in $\overline{F_x}$ and $\overline{F_y}$ is 7.20% and 17.82%, respectively, and the maximum increase in $\overline{F_z}$ is 281%. As the ultrasonic amplitude and frequency increase, $\overline{F_z}$ significantly rises, but the effect on $\overline{F_x}$ and $\overline{F_y}$ is weak. AUVAG improves the surface quality of the specimen.