Study on Arithmetic of Surface Damage Ratio in High Speed Machining of Graphite Based on Matlab Image Processing

Article Preview

Abstract:

The surface quality of graphite cannot be completely evaluated only by the roughness value Ra measured by profilometer. The surface damage ratio Sc is presented to give quantitative description of surface quality of graphite, which was calculated as the ratio of the projection area of fracture craters to the overall area of free surface. The machined surface was observed and taken photo by use of the stereo microscope with CCD image acquisition system. Matlab image processing tool was used to convert the color photo to binary image, in which fracture craters were shown as black pixels and the other surfaces as white pixels. The surface damage ratio is the result of the sum of black pixels divided by the overall pixels. Under the same conditions of high speed machining experiments for verification, the surface damage ratio was calculated in comparison with the Ra values measured by profilometer. The variation tendency of surface damage ratios exhibited good coherence to the measured roughness.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 652-654)

Pages:

2196-2199

Citation:

Online since:

January 2013

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2013 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

[1] C.Y. Wang, L. Zhou, H. Fu and Z.L. Hu: Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering Vol. 20(2007), pp.27-31.

Google Scholar

[2] L. Zhou: Research on High Speed Milling of High-performed Graphite (Ph. D Thesis, Guangdong University of Technology, P.R. China, 2007) In Chinese.

Google Scholar

[3] Information on http: /www. poco. com.

Google Scholar

[4] Information on http: /www. sttanso. com.

Google Scholar

[5] L. Zhou, C.Y. Wang, Z. Qin: Key Engineering Materials Vol. 257-258(2004), pp.858-863.

Google Scholar

[6] L. Zhou, C.Y. Wang, Z. Qin: Materials and Manufacturing Processes 24(2009), pp.1365-1372.

Google Scholar