Analysis of surface roughness and cutting force during turning of Ti6Al4V ELI in dry environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the effect of cutting parameters on the surface roughness and cutting force of titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V ELI when turning using PVD TiAlN coated tool in dry environment. Taguchi L9 orthogonal array design of experiment was used for the turning experiment 2 factors and 3 levels. Turning parameters studied were cutting speed (50, 65, 80 m/min), feed rate (0.08, 0.15, 0.2 mm/rev) and depth of cut 0.5 mm constant. Linear and second order model of the surface roughness and cutting force has been developed in terms of cutting speed and feed. The results show that the feed rate was the most impact factor controlling the cutting force and surface roughness produced. MINITAB 17software was used to develop a linear and second order model of surface roughness and cutting force. Optimum condition was at 66.97 m/min of cutting speed, 0.08 mm/rev of feed rate. Surface roughness 0.57m and cutting force 54.02 N were obtained at the optimum condition. A good agreement between the experimental and predicted surface roughness and cutting force were observed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".