Advertisement

Assessment of the Production Reducer for Clamping the Drilling Tools

  • Peter Michalik
  • Vieroslav Molnár
  • Martin Ambrozy
  • Michal Petruš
  • Peter Tirpak
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)

Abstract

The article deals with the evaluation of the production of the reduction clamping mandrel on the milling machine. The reducer is designed to clamp the drill tool with a 16 mm diameter cylindrical shank so that it can be clamped into the clamping head of the drill with a maximum diameter of 13 mm. The clamping tool itself is secured with two screws. The billets of the reducer are selected from the available manufactured steel parts, allowing it to be maximally fast and meet the production criteria. The material of the joined parts guarantees guaranteed weldability. The technological process, the method of clamping and setting of the tooling was chosen so as to achieve the desired deviations of co-ordination of the two coupled cylindrical components. Measurement of the produced diameter of the reducer and evaluation of co-ordination was done on the THOME 3D measuring instrument. It has been measured the diameter and the deviation of the co-ordinates of the produced cylindrical surfaces with a maximum value of 0.0053 mm, with a maximum quadratic error of 0.003543 mm. The produced reducer clamp was tested for the production of cylindrical holes by a 25 mm diameter drill. By measuring, stamping and practical application of the clamping mandrel, the possibility of replacing turning operations at the CNC milling center was confirmed.

Keywords

Reducer Drilling tools Turning Milling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is a part of research project VEGA 1/0045/18.

References

  1. 1.
    Murčinková, Z., et al.: Research and analysis of stress distribution in multilayers of coated tools. Int. J. Mater. Res. 108, 495–506 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fedorko, G., et al.: Failure analysis of textile rubber conveyor belt damaged by dynamic wear. Eng. Fail. Anal. 28, 103–114 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hosovsky, A., et al.: Preliminary investigation of static and dynamic hysteresis of DMSP-5 fluidic muscle. MM Sci. J. (2018)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Miko, E., Nowakowski, L.: Analysis and verification of surface roughness constitution model after machining process. Procedia Eng. 39, 395–404 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mantic, M., et al.: Influence of selected digitization methods on final accuracy of 3D model, pp. 475–480 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Straka, Ľ., et al.: Properties evaluation of thin microhardened surface layer of tool steel after wire EDM. Metals (Basel) 6, 95 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liptai, P., et al.: Check measurements of magnetic flux density: equipment design and the determination of the confidence interval for EFA 300 measuring devices. Meas. J. Int. Meas. Confed. 111, 51–59 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baron, P., et al.: Research and application of methods of technical diagnostics for the verification of the design node. Measurement 94, 245–253 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lehocka, D., et al.: Comparison of the influence of acoustically enhanced pulsating water jet on selected surface integrity characteristics of CW004A copper and CW614N brass. Measurement 110, 230–238 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nag, A., et al.: Hybrid aluminium matrix composite AWJ turning using olivine and Barton garnet. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 94, 293–2300 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Monka, P., et al.: Design and experimental study of turning tools with linear cutting edges and comparison to commercial tools. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 85, 2325–2343 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Srivastava, V.S., et al.: Surface roughness a measurement of in-situ metal matrix composite Al7075/B4C, vol. 6, pp. 358–362 (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Michalik
    • 1
  • Vieroslav Molnár
    • 2
  • Martin Ambrozy
    • 2
  • Michal Petruš
    • 3
  • Peter Tirpak
    • 4
  1. 1.Faculty of Manufacturing Technologies with Seat in PresovTechnical University of KosiceKošiceSlovak Republic
  2. 2.LevočaSlovak Republic
  3. 3.Milpoš 177Slovak Republic
  4. 4.Ložin 177Slovak Republic

Personalised recommendations