Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Machinability analysis of nickel-based superalloy Nimonic 90: a comparison between wet and LCO2 as a cryogenic coolant
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Machinability analysis of nickel-based superalloy Nimonic 90: a comparison between wet and LCO2 as a cryogenic coolant
Do you wish to request the book?
Machinability analysis of nickel-based superalloy Nimonic 90: a comparison between wet and LCO2 as a cryogenic coolant
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Machinability analysis of nickel-based superalloy Nimonic 90: a comparison between wet and LCO2 as a cryogenic coolant
2021
Overview
The usage of cryogenic fluid is increasing in the machining industries especially to cut the materials having a lower machinability like Nimonic 90, a nickel-based alloy. However, the comparison of flood coolant and LCO
2
as a cryogenic fluid based on machining performance has not been found for machining Nimonic 90. In this regard, this study compares LCO
2
and conventional mineral oil-based flood coolant on the basis of machining performance while turning Nimonic 90. The effect of turning process parameters (cutting speed (
v
c
), feed (
f
), and depth of cut (
a
p
)) and cutting fluids has been identified by analyzing machinability indicators like cutting force, flank tool wear, power consumption, surface roughness in terms of
R
a
, and chip morphology. Increment of 34%, 25%, and 24% in cutting forces has been observed for cryogenic turning using LCO
2
in comparison with wet machining when the values of
a
p
are 0.75, 0.50, and 0.25 mm, respectively. A decrement of 63% tool wear has been seen in LCO
2
cryogenic fluid in contrast to wet machining at higher values of
v
c
,
f
, and
a
p
. The superior surface finish has been found in wet machining, while lesser power consumption was recorded for LCO
2
as a cutting fluid. Cryogenic machining provided better chip breakability in comparison with wet machining.
Publisher
Springer London,Springer Nature B.V
