The boring operation is prone to chatter as the boring bar is slender and has an overhang. For chatter suppression, passive, semi-active or active control methods can be employed. In the present work, a boring bar has been specially designed to transfer vibration to a cantilever bar surrounded by magneto rheological (MR) fluid. The MR fluid when exposed to electromagnetic flux changes its rheological property within a certain range. Thus, the boring bar is able to exhibit variable damping characteristics by changing the excitation current. The modal parameters are experimentally obtained through an impact test and a shaker test. The variation of modal parameters with excitation current is discussed. A stability lobe diagram is also developed from the model parameters, showing safe and unsafe regions for operation. The semi-active boring bar developed in the present work can be used for the suppression of chatter during the boring operation.
AhmadianM (1999) On the isolation properties of semi-active dampers. Journal of Vibration and Control5(2): 217–232.
2.
ÅkessonHSmirnovaTHåkanssonL (2009) Analysis of dynamic properties of boring bars concerning different clamping conditions. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing23(8): 2629–2647.
3.
AndrenLHåkanssonLBrandtAet al. (2004) Identification of dynamic properties of boring bar vibrations in a continuous boring operation. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing18(4): 869–901.
4.
BijuCVShunmugamMS (2014) Investigation into effect of Particle Impact Damping (PID) on surface topography in boring operation. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology75: 1219–1231.
5.
ChengK (2009) Machining Dynamics: Fundamentals, Applications and Practices, London: Springer.
6.
ChiuWChanK (1997) Design and testing of piezoelectric actuator-controlled boring bar for active compensation of cutting force induced errors. International Journal of Production Economics51(1): 135–148.
7.
ChockalingamSNatarajanUGeorge CyrilA (2015) Damping investigation in boring bar using hybrid copper-zinc particles. Journal of Vibration and Control. Epub ahead of print 12 October 2015. DOI: 10.1177/1077546315610946.
8.
EmaSMaruiE (1996) Damping characteristics of an impact damper and its application. International of Machine tools Manufacture36(3): 293–306.
9.
HahnRS (1972) Boring bar. Patent 3,642,378, USA, 1972.
10.
LaiCYLiaoWH (2002) Vibration control of a suspension system via a magnetorheological fluid damper. Journal of Vibration and Control8(4): 527–547.
11.
MeiC (2005) Active regenerative chatter suppression during boring manufacturing process. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing21(2): 153–158.
12.
MeiDKongTShihAJet al. (2009) Magnetorheological fluid-controlled boring bar for chatter suppression. Journal of Materials Processing Technology209(4): 1861–1870.
13.
MiguelezMRubioLLoyaJAet al. (2010) Improvement of chatter stability in boring operations with passive vibration absorbers. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences52(10): 1376–1384.
14.
PrattJRNayfehAH (2001) Chatter control and stability analysis of a cantilever boring bar under regenerative cutting conditions. Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Science, Nonlinear Dynamics in Metal Cutting359: 759–792.
15.
QuintanaGCiuranaJ (2011) Chatter in machining processes: A review. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture51(5): 363–376.
16.
RivinEIKangH (1992) Enhancement of dynamic stability of cantilever tooling structures. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture32(4): 539–561.
17.
RubioLLoyaJAMiguelezMHet al. (2013) Optimization of passive vibration absorbers to reduce chatter in boring. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing41: 691–704.
18.
SaravanamuruganSThirunarayanaswamyAKaliyannanD (2013) Optimization of damped dynamic vibration absorber to control chatter in metal cutting process. Journal of Vibration and Control. Epub ahead of print 17 July 2013. DOI: 10.1177/1077546313492554.
19.
SchmitzTLSmithKS (2008) Machining Dynamics: Frequency Response to Improved Productivity, New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
20.
SongQShiJLiuZet al. (2016) Boring bar with constrained layer damper for improving process stability. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology83: 1951–1966.
21.
TanakaHObataFMatsubaraTet al. (1994) Active chatter suppression of slender boring bar using piezoelectric actuators. JSME International Journal. Series C, Dynamics, Control, Robotics, Design and Manufacturing37(3): 601–606.
22.
TewaniSGRouchKEWalcottBL (1995) A study of cutting process stability of a boring bar with active dynamic absorber. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture35(1): 91–108.
23.
WangDHLiaoWH (2005) Semiactive controllers for magnetorheological fluid dampers. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures16(11-12): 983–993.
24.
WangMFeiR (2001) On-line chatter detection and control in boring based on an electrorheological fluid. Mechatronics11(7): 779–792.
25.
Wong BW, Walcott BL and Rouch KE (1995) Active vibration control via electromagnetic dynamic absorbers. In: Proceedings of the 4th IEEE conference on control application, Albany, NY, 28–29 September, pp.868–874. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
26.
YaoZMeiDChenZ (2011) Chatter suppression by parametric excitation: Model and experiments. Journal of Sound and Vibration330(13): 2995–3005.
