SURFACE ROUGHNESS AND CUTTING FORCES IN TURNING OF TOOL STEEL WITH MIXED CERAMIC AND CUBIC BORON NITRIDE CUTTING TOOLS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tool steel has been widely used, especially to manufacture forming dies and molds by machining processes. Generally, cubic boron nitride (CBN) and ceramic tools are recommended for finish machining a specific steel. This study contributes to filling the research gap for the selection of low- content CBN tools or mixed ceramic tools for turning of hard tool steel. The turning tests were conducted to determine the performance of CBN and the mixed ceramic tools in turning soft (HRC22) and hard (HRC52) H13 tool steel with different cutting speeds, feed rates and depths of cut. ANOVA was used to determine the interaction of the cutting parameters on the surface roughness and cutting forces obtained from turning tests. The results indicate that the surface roughness in hard turning was lower with the CBN tool than with the ceramic tool. On the other hand, the cutting forces in turning with the ceramic tool were lower. Acceptable regular chip formation increases with the cutting speed for each tool.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".