Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Surface properties of the cut face obtained by different cutting methods from
AISI 304 stainless steel materials
Adnan Akkurt*
Faculty of Industrial Arts Education, Gazi University, Golbasi, Ankara, Turkey
Received 8 May 2009; accepted 22 September 2009
AISI 304 stainless steel which is widely used almost in all industrial applications is accounted for approximately 50%
of the worlds stainless steel production and consumption. Because of its aesthetic view in architectures, resistance against
corrosion and chemicals, it became as the most preferred material. Today several methods for machining of AISI
304 stainless steel are available. Most of these methods result in loss of superior properties of the stainless steel material and
makes it to act like other ordinary materials within the machined zones. In this study, specimens taken from the AISI
304 material are cut by the cutting methods which are commonly used in machining. The resulting surface properties of
these specimens are compared with original materials with respect to different methods. Finally mechanical and
metallurgical properties of the cut face obtained by each method are examined. The results show that cutting with abrasive
water jet gives the most favorable result while oxygen cutting gives the worst.
Keywords: Cutting methods, Comparison of cutting methods, AISI 304 stainless steel material, Surface characteristic,
Surface quality
374
375
Fig. 4 Comparison of volumetric metal removal ratios related to power levels of machining methods10
Table 1 General comparison of abrasive water jet with other cutting methods3
Comparison of abrasive water jet with other cutting methods
Comparison factor
Material thickness
Cutting quality
Lateral feed rate
Multipurpose use
Heat affected zone
(HAZ)
Precision cutting
Secondary treatment
requirement
Slurry formation
Production flexibility
Total machining time
Abrasive water
jet
A
A
B
A
Laser
cutting
C
A
A
D
Plasma
cutting
B
C
B
B
Water shield
plasma cut
B
B
B
B
Wire electro
discharge
A
A
B
B
Milling
cutting
B
B
B
B
Hydraulic
saw
B
B
A
B
Oxygen
cutting
A
C
B
C
B
A
B
C
B
B
C
C
D
C
C
D
A
B
B
B
A
B
D
C
A
B
D
C
376
Fig. 5 Comparison of cutting abilities of different cutting methods by using single orifice jet beam16
377
Table 2 Chemical composition of stainless steel material; AISI 304 Austenite () stabilizer 304
V
Si
Mn
Mo
Cu
Cr
Ni
Fe
Nb
Co
0.116
0.498
0.979
0.217
0.228
17.30
8.06
72.30
0.0476
0.0338
0.0210
0.147
3.5 l/min
20 mm
48C
6 bar
200 bar
0.25 mm
20 bar
0.75 mm
3 l/min
4 mm
800 m/s
400 MPa
55C
90
380 V
Energy consumption
58 kwh
250 g/min
Sapphire
Abrasive used
GMA Garnet
Chemical Composition
Fe2O3Al2 (SIO4)3
Abrasive hardness
7.5 - 8 Mohs
300 m
0.75 mm
Nozzle length
76.2 mm
Slurry content
% 18
88.9 mm
1.27 mm
40-50 h
20 m/min
20 m/min
Position rate
140 m/min
Plate positioning
By Laser
Laser power
1550 Wt
760 A
GW 0-100 %
Nozzle pressure
12 bar
Pulse type
Mega pulse
Operating pressure
24 bar
2000 Hz
Operating frequency
50 Hz
Pulse time
NP(T)
1500 s
SP(t)
120 s
4000 kcal/h
Cooling capacity
Mod type
400 V
Focus distance
7.5 mm
68 dB(A)
Cutting gas
Nitrogen
Cutting gas
Oxygen+Nitrogen
1.2 bar
35 mm
Cooling temperature
TA=25C
Cutting capacity
4000 7000 mm
20 m/min
Processing condition
C521
760 A
Feed rate
3 m/min
Nozzle pressure
10 bar
378
20 bar
ON
OFF
IP
HP
MA
SV
SF
Operating frequency
50 Hz
006
15
17
15
0.3
0.3 005
Cooling capacity
4000 kcal/h
Voltage
32 V
Current
5.6 A
Nominal voltage
400 V
Wire tension
Level 8
68 dB(A)
7 m/min
Cutting gas
Oxygen+Propane
Control system
Fine APT
C
0
Parameters for each cutting methods are selected in accordance with the machine manufacturers recommendations.
379
380
(a)
(e)
(b)
(f)
(c)
(g)
(d)
(h)
Fig. 8 Micro structure pictures of cut edges (a) cutting with hydraulic saw, (b) milling cutting, (c) cutting with water shield plasma,
(d) laser cutting, (e) plasma cutting, (f) cutting with abrasive water jet, (g) cutting with wire electro discharge and (h) cutting with oxygen
flame
381
382
% Change
185.67
184.50
171.50
171.17
145.33
157.67
156.83
163.33
165.83
0.63
7.63
7.81
21.73
15.08
15.53
12.03
10.69
383
Fig. 11 Hardness variations from the cut edge toward the center
Conclusions
The following conclusion may be drawn from the
results obtained by cutting of AISI 304 stainless steel
materials by different cutting methods:
(i) Regarding the effect of cutting methods on
metallurgical properties of cut faces, AWJ
cutting method became prominent yielding in
the most favorable results.
(ii) As different heating and cooling effects
occurred during application of different
cutting methods constitute significant impacts
on metallurgical properties of the material
being tested, no heat affected zone (HAZ)
occurred throughout the surface cut by AWJ
and no deformation can be observed in the
original structure of the material. This does
not mean that there will be no change in
mechanical properties related to the
metallurgical properties. Besides, main reason
for not having a deformation in the
microstructure throughout the cut zone is that
high temperatures do not occur during cutting
with AWJ.
(iii) Among the eight different methods examined,
when an evaluation is made based on changes
in microstructure throughout the heat affected
zone, cutting with oxygen flame is
observed to be the worst method and cutting
with AWJ as the best method. Among the
applied methods, cutting with oxygen flame
method is approved to be the worst one
resulting in greatest change in hardness
384