Machining behaviour of three high-performance engineering plastics

Polymeric materials have been widely used to replace traditional metallic materials due to their high specific elastic properties. Even though polymeric materials can be produced as near net shapes, machining is still required to make the assembling of the final products. The selection of tool and cutting conditions is very important to machine plastics because of the high ductility and low melting point of the materials. In this study, the machining behaviour of high-performance engineering polymers, such as ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene, polyoxymethylene and polytetrafluoroethylene, has been investigated using a full-factorial design (design of experiment). The effect of the factors such as feed speed, spindle speed and drill point angle was identified for each of the response variables (circularity error, surface roughness (Ra) and thrust force (Ff)). The drilling mechanism was substantially affected by the physical and mechanical properties of the polymers. Different cutting set-up conditions were able to optimize the responses. The polytetrafluoroethylene exhibited better results, achieving lower circularity error, surface roughness and thrust force. In the opposite manner, the ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene exhibited a rough topography at low feed rate and spindle speed levels.

[1]  J. A. Brydson,et al.  1. – The Historical Development of Plastics Materials , 1989 .

[2]  R. Krishnamurthy,et al.  Evaluation of PCD tool performance during machining of carbon/phenolic ablative composites , 2000 .

[3]  C. F. Jeff Wu,et al.  Experiments: Planning, Analysis, and Parameter Design Optimization , 2000 .

[4]  A. Abrão,et al.  The effect of cutting tool geometry on thrust force and delamination when drilling glass fibre reinforced plastic composite , 2008 .

[5]  Fred Spiring,et al.  Introduction to Statistical Quality Control , 2007, Technometrics.

[6]  P. Törmälä,et al.  Material properties of a , 2021, Practical Micromechanics of Composite Materials.

[7]  Karen A. F. Copeland Experiments: Planning, Analysis, and Parameter Design Optimization , 2002 .

[8]  Federica Chiellini,et al.  Polymeric Materials for Bone and Cartilage Repair , 2010 .

[9]  Hong Hocheng,et al.  Effects of special drill bits on drilling-induced delamination of composite materials , 2006 .

[10]  F. Stan,et al.  Machining and surface integrity of polymeric materials , 2008 .

[11]  Hiroki Endo,et al.  Small-hole drilling in engineering plastics sheet and its accuracy estimation , 2006 .

[12]  W. Sawyer,et al.  Environmental dependence of ultra-low wear behavior of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and alumina composites suggests tribochemical mechanisms , 2012 .

[13]  A. Abrão,et al.  Effects of high speed in the drilling of glass whisker-reinforced polyamide composites (PA66 GF30): statistical analysis of the roughness parameters , 2011 .

[14]  Stefan Simeonov Dimov,et al.  Prototype tooling for producing small series of polymer microparts , 2011 .

[15]  J. Paulo Davim,et al.  Machinability study on composite (polyetheretherketone reinforced with 30% glass fibre–PEEK GF 30) using polycrystalline diamond (PCD) and cemented carbide (K20) tools , 2004 .

[16]  J. Davim,et al.  A comparative evaluation of the turning of reinforced and unreinforced polyamide , 2007 .

[17]  K. Knoerzer,et al.  Adiabatic compression heating coefficients for high-pressure processing - a study of some insulating polymer materials. , 2010 .