購(gòu)買(mǎi)設(shè)計(jì)請(qǐng)充值后下載，，資源目錄下的文件所見(jiàn)即所得，都可以點(diǎn)開(kāi)預(yù)覽，，資料完整，充值下載可得到資源目錄里的所有文件。。?！咀ⅰ浚篸wg后綴為CAD圖紙，doc,docx為WORD文檔，原稿無(wú)水印，可編輯。。。帶三維備注的都有三維源文件，由于部分三維子文件較多，店主做了壓縮打包，都可以保證打開(kāi)的，三維預(yù)覽圖都是店主用電腦打開(kāi)后截圖的，具體請(qǐng)見(jiàn)文件預(yù)覽，有不明白之處，可咨詢(xún)QQ:1304139763===========題目最后備注XX系列，只是店主整理分類(lèi)，與內(nèi)容無(wú)關(guān)，請(qǐng)忽視

中國(guó)地質(zhì)大學(xué)長(zhǎng)城學(xué)院畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì) 外文資料翻譯譯文 從生態(tài)加工技術(shù)對(duì)攻絲的研究 摘 要 這項(xiàng)研究是關(guān)于攻螺紋（扭矩，攻絲，磨損，工作硬度等）的加工特性。在生態(tài)加工技術(shù)操作下，涂有TiN的MMC（鋁合金金屬?gòu)?fù)合材料）攻螺絲形成的攻絲得到了調(diào)查，并與沒(méi)有涂層的特性進(jìn)行了比較。下面的結(jié)果就是從這份研究中得到的：1.TiN涂層攻絲的刀具壽命是沒(méi)有攻絲的四倍；2.有TiN涂層的攻絲形成的螺紋比沒(méi)有的加工硬化要低。 關(guān)鍵詞：攻絲； 攻螺絲； 螺紋； 生態(tài)加工； 鉆孔 1．引言 螺栓、螺釘機(jī)械連接中的螺紋是機(jī)械部件的最重要緊固系統(tǒng)之一。螺紋制造有很多種方法，特別攻螺絲是用來(lái)生產(chǎn)內(nèi)螺紋的有效的技術(shù)。 最近，每年都強(qiáng)調(diào)增加生產(chǎn)力。據(jù)說(shuō)現(xiàn)在的車(chē)間里，最重要和最嚴(yán)重的問(wèn)題是提高生產(chǎn)力。怎樣改善孔加工（鉆/鉸孔和攻絲）已成為一個(gè)嚴(yán)重的問(wèn)題。傳統(tǒng)的刀具材料限制了生產(chǎn)力的提高，如高速鋼刀具加工鋁合金金屬?gòu)?fù)合材料（MMC）時(shí)刀具壽命很短由于碳化硅粒子的腐蝕天性。因此，刀具的磨損和破壞阻礙了生產(chǎn)力的提高。為了實(shí)現(xiàn)理想的生產(chǎn)力，攻絲已經(jīng)吸引了車(chē)間工程師的注意。 在這項(xiàng)研究中，用攻絲加工MMC，利用攻絲（扭矩，攻絲磨損，工作硬度等）的切割特點(diǎn)， 有TiN涂層和沒(méi)有涂層的都進(jìn)行了調(diào)查。 2. 實(shí)驗(yàn)方法 2.1實(shí)驗(yàn)裝置 攻絲試驗(yàn)在辛辛那提5’NC-MC (5HP)進(jìn)行。該（鉆孔和攻絲） 儀器和數(shù)據(jù)采集系統(tǒng)如圖2.1。切削力（推力和扭矩）測(cè)定使用三個(gè)類(lèi)型9273 壓電電力測(cè)功器和相應(yīng)的場(chǎng)所用5007電荷放大器放大。得到的信號(hào)，然后傳遞到A / D轉(zhuǎn)換器AZI-16-12 ，連接到個(gè)人電腦。切削力測(cè)量安裝如圖2.2。 2.2工件，鉆及塔 在本實(shí)驗(yàn)中使用的工件是鋁合金（2618 MMC）的增強(qiáng)，15％碳化硅顆粒。形成無(wú)槽絲錐的螺紋是M10如圖2.3和兩種類(lèi)型的攻絲被用來(lái)在調(diào)查過(guò)程中。 攻絲的形狀類(lèi)似于螺釘?shù)男螤睿∕10，孔距1.5），無(wú)論有沒(méi)有氮化鈦涂層。 定位孔的直徑9.3mm，用于所有試驗(yàn)和聚晶金剛石攻絲鉆孔（高速鋼硬質(zhì)合金碳化鎢和聚晶金剛石鉆孔）用在所有測(cè)試。本實(shí)驗(yàn)中用的鉆頭如圖2.4。 圖2.1 竊聽(tīng)器和數(shù)據(jù)采集儀器 圖2.2 Schmatic圖?的竊聽(tīng)系統(tǒng) 圖2.3 水龍頭用于這項(xiàng)工作 2.3儀表和檢測(cè)方法的線(xiàn)程 線(xiàn)程的估計(jì)是用螺紋規(guī)來(lái)衡量。結(jié)果被分為A等和B等[ 1 ]。硬鋁合金[ 2 ]螺紋深度是攻絲直徑的1.4倍。 甲等-質(zhì)量：直徑通過(guò)整個(gè)螺紋測(cè)量。 乙等-質(zhì)量：直徑至少15毫米。 圖2.5是顯示的直徑指標(biāo)(M10×1.5 ISO 6H)。 2.4實(shí)驗(yàn)特性 攻絲試驗(yàn)時(shí)，切削速度（攻絲的轉(zhuǎn)速）是215 rpm和進(jìn)給速度0.1mm/rev （322.5mm/min）。冷卻油（氯和硫免費(fèi)熱切割石油）手動(dòng)供應(yīng)。 3.實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果與討論 在M10攻絲操作的推力和扭矩信號(hào)顯示在圖3.1 。結(jié)果表明，隨著螺紋扣數(shù)的形成，扭矩增大，離開(kāi)孔時(shí)減小。然而，可以看到幾乎沒(méi)有推力的增加。 圖2.4 形狀的聚晶金剛石鉆頭 圖2.5 螺紋規(guī) 3.1轉(zhuǎn)矩比較 圖3.2顯示是先前所提到的有TiN涂層和沒(méi)有涂層的第1孔和第8孔攻絲的扭矩信號(hào)。 圖2.1 參數(shù)確定 圖3.1 圖切削力信號(hào)根據(jù)竊聽(tīng)測(cè)試扭矩 圖3.2 比較扭矩信號(hào)（第1洞和第8洞）與扭矩 在攻絲操作的初始階段顯示推力和扭矩的增加。然而，當(dāng)螺紋成形進(jìn)入全速時(shí)，推力顯示出下降的趨勢(shì)伴隨著扭矩的增加和攻絲縮回，在螺紋孔口也可以看到負(fù)扭矩的出現(xiàn)。 圖3.1負(fù)推力值是攻絲偏離中心的結(jié)果是因?yàn)橐环讲徽?dāng)?shù)墓ぜ毒叩陌惭b或定位空的表面粗糙度。 上述不確定的因素是定位孔的表面粗糙度。 當(dāng)有TiN涂層第一孔的攻螺紋的攻絲扭矩值8.7 Nm而沒(méi)有涂層的值是11.2Nm，得到扭矩信號(hào)。因而，第一孔有涂層的相比沒(méi)有涂層的扭矩減少了28 ％。而對(duì)第8孔有TiN涂層的扭矩相比沒(méi)有涂層減少了52 ％。 初始階段和在攻絲突破點(diǎn)前扭矩信號(hào)的比較表明，沒(méi)有涂層的攻絲扭矩減少要明顯于有TiN涂層的攻絲。可以說(shuō)，就形成的攻絲而言，在車(chē)螺紋時(shí)工作是均勻分布在刮削端。扭矩的比較結(jié)果總結(jié)在圖3.3 。結(jié)果表明，有TiN涂層的攻絲扭矩一般低于那些沒(méi)有涂層的攻絲。 3.2螺紋形式的比較 有TiN涂層和沒(méi)有涂層的攻絲的螺紋形式如圖3.4 。在螺紋孔①，②，③ ，④位置的橫截面的放大圖像以及1，4，8號(hào)孔作了比較。 圖3.4是不同位置螺紋的照片模型，而圖3.5是八號(hào)孔放大的圖像。 可以從圖3.5 中看出，有TiN涂層攻絲形成的螺紋的側(cè)面① ②沒(méi)有異常。相反，沒(méi)有涂層表明孔的進(jìn)口和出口相應(yīng)的①號(hào)和④號(hào)位置無(wú)規(guī)律。 圖3.3 比較扭矩信號(hào)同類(lèi)型 圖3.4 闡明的軸向截面建制線(xiàn)程 為了驗(yàn)證上述的意見(jiàn)，對(duì)孔①和②進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的分析進(jìn)行。結(jié)果總結(jié)在圖3.6 。圖3.6（a）和（b）給出了1號(hào)和8號(hào)螺紋孔各自的①和②位置的結(jié)果?？梢杂^察圖3.6（a），有TiN涂層的攻絲齒形遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)優(yōu)于沒(méi)有涂層的。 3.3比較加工硬化 當(dāng)采用有TiN涂層和沒(méi)有涂層的攻絲車(chē)螺紋時(shí)，研究比較加工硬化的嚴(yán)重性。 本研究結(jié)果歸納于圖3.7 。選用了兩種類(lèi)型中1號(hào)攻絲。 有TiN涂層和沒(méi)有涂層的結(jié)果分別在圖3.7（a）和（b）。用能受100 gw的硬度測(cè)量硬度儀測(cè)量硬度。 結(jié)果表明，有TiN涂層的攻螺紋的硬度低于沒(méi)有涂層的。上述結(jié)果表明，在以下幾個(gè)方面，如螺紋形式和加工硬化等，有TiN涂層的攻絲優(yōu)于沒(méi)有涂層的攻絲。 圖3.5 比較線(xiàn)程形式 圖3.6 比較擴(kuò)大線(xiàn)程形式 3.4刀具壽命的比較 有TiN涂層和沒(méi)有涂層的攻絲被用來(lái)調(diào)查性能和攻絲的刀具壽命一樣高。每種類(lèi)型的攻絲反復(fù)進(jìn)行3次試驗(yàn)，。結(jié)果總結(jié)在圖3.8 。 螺紋規(guī)讀數(shù)用A,B值評(píng)估。結(jié)果表明，在刀具壽命達(dá)到限制前，螺紋孔的平均數(shù)，是沒(méi)有TiN涂層攻絲的X = 13和有涂層攻絲的X = 49。有TiN涂層攻絲的刀具壽命是沒(méi)有涂層的3.8倍。 3.5比較塔磨損 圖3.9顯示各種類(lèi)型攻絲的刀具磨損，在實(shí)驗(yàn)中車(chē)螺紋后如圖3.8所示。應(yīng)當(dāng)指出的是，所有用于比較的攻絲已充分達(dá)到刀具壽命。有TiN涂層和沒(méi)有涂層的攻絲分別如圖3.9（a）和（b），?？梢钥闯?，所有攻絲的刀具磨損點(diǎn)。此外，可以看到大量的磨損在分界線(xiàn)上。有TiN涂層和沒(méi)有涂層攻絲的比較，如放大點(diǎn)，結(jié)果表明，后者的磨損明顯高于前者。就有TiN涂層攻絲來(lái)說(shuō)，在刀具磨損區(qū)可以看到覆蓋的TiN涂層。 圖3.7 比較硬度分布 圖3.8 用攻絲的刀具壽命的比較 圖3.9 用攻絲的刀具磨損比較 4.結(jié)論 4.1有TiN涂層的刀具的壽命大約是沒(méi)有涂層的刀具壽命的4倍。 4.2和沒(méi)有TiN涂層的刀具相比，有涂層刀具的扭轉(zhuǎn)力下降了28 ％。 4.3和沒(méi)有TiN涂層的刀具相比，帶有涂層的齒形螺紋刀具則顯示出更少的不規(guī)則性。 4.4有TiN涂層的刀具的硬度低于沒(méi)有涂層的刀具。 4.5從以上結(jié)果顯示， 有TiN涂層的刀具在以下方面優(yōu)于沒(méi)有涂層的刀具：刀具壽命，螺紋樣式和加工硬化等。 參考文獻(xiàn) [1] WOLFGANGSTRACHE : Alternative Strategies for the Production of Threads in Aluminum-based SIC Reinforced Metal Matrix Composite (MMC) Alloy,1993. [2] Beitz.W : Dubbel-Taschhenbuch fuer den Maschinenbau. ISBN 3-540-52381-2, (1990), G15. 外文原文 A Study on Tapping Viewed from Eco-Machining Technology Abstract This study deals with machining characteristics of thread tapping (torque, tap, wear, workhardness etc.) The tapping of MMC (aluminum alloy metal matrix composite) with TiN coated forming taps under eco-machining technology operation, where chips are not produced and ejected from the tap flute, was investigated and compared with the characteristics during uncoated tapping. The following results are obtained from this study. 1.The tool life of TiN coated taps was 4 times longer than that of uncoated tap；2.Threads formed with the TiN coated taps exhibit lower work hardening than those formed with uncoated taps. Keywords: Tap； Tapping； Thread； Eco-Machining； Drilling 1. Introduction Threads form the mechanical joint of a bolt–screw connection, which is one of the most important fastening systems for mechanical components. There are many ways of thread making, especially that of tapping which has been employed as an efficient technique for the production of internal threads. Recently, the rise of productivity has been emphasized year by year. Also it is said that the improvement of productivity is one of the most important and serious problem in today’s machine shops. The improvement of hole making production (drilling/reaming and tapping) has become a serious matter. One factor limiting productivity gains has been that conventional tool materials such as HSS exhibit very short tool lives when machining an aluminum alloy metal matrix composite (MMC) due to the abrasive nature of the SiC particles. Therefore, the improvement has been obstructed by various problems as rapid tool wear and failure. As a mean of achieving the desired productivity gains, forming taps have caught the attention of machine shop engineers. In this study, cutting characteristics of tapping (torque, taps wear, work hardness, etc.) during the tapping of MMC with forming taps, both TiN coated and uncoated was investigated. 2. Experimental Methods 2.1 Experimental Equipment The tapping tests were conducted on a Cincinati 5’NC-MC (5HP). The (drilling and tapping) apparatus and data acquisition system are presented in Figure 2.1. The cutting forces (thrust and torque) were measured using a three component Kistler Type 9273 Piezo-electric dynamometer and the corresponding locus was amplified by a Kistler type 5007 charge amplifier. The signal obtained was then passed to a Towa A/D converter type AZI-16-12, connected to a personal computer. A schematic diagram of the cutting force measuring setup is presented in Figure 2.2. 2.2 Workpiece, Drill and Tap The workpiece used in this experiment is aluminum alloy (2618 MMC) reinforced with 15 vol% silicon carbide (SiC) particulate. The thread forming fluteless taps were M10 as shown in Figure 2.3 and two types of taps were used during the course of the investigation. The shape of the taps was similar to the shape of a screw (M10, Pitch:1.5), either uncoated or coated with Titanium nitride (TiN). Pilot holes of 9.3mm diameter were used for all trials and PCD tipped drills (HSS cemented tungsten carbide and polycrystalline diamond drilling) were employed in all the tests. The shape of drill used in this test is shown in Figure 2.4. 2.3 Gauge and Inspection Method of Thread The estimate of threads was performed with a thread gauge (Go-NoGo gauge).The results were classified as A and B quality[1]. Where, 1.4×tapped diameter is Diameter is the recommended depth of thread of hard Aluminum alloy[2]. A – quality : Gauge can be turned through the whole thread. B – quality : Gauge can be turned in at least 15mm. Figure 2.5 shows the appearance of gauge (M10×1.5 ISO 6H). 2.4 Experimental Characteristics Tapping tests were conducted at a cutting speed (rotational speed of tap) of 215 rpm and feed rate of 0.1mm/rev (322.5mm/min). Coolant oil (Chlorine and sulphur free heat cutting oil) was supplied manually. 3. Experimental Results And Discussion Cutting Forces in Tapping (thrust, torque) The thrust and torque signals produced in this tapping operation with a M10 tap are shown in Figure 3.1. The results show that torque increases with number of threads formed and decreases at the instant that the tap is about to break through the outlet of the hole. Whereas, little increase in thrust can be observed. 3.1 Comparison of Torque Figure 3.2 shows torque signals of tap in the 1st hole and 8th holes for the TiN-coated and uncoated taps mentioned in the previous section. At the initial stage of the tapping operation both thrust and torque show an increase in magnitude. However, when the thread forming operation enters full gear, the thrust force shows a decreasing trend accompanied with in increase in torque and as the tap retracts after breakthrough, a negative torque of 5N magnitude can be observed across a few threads at hole outlet. The negative thrust value observed in Figure 3.1 is the outcome of the deflection of the tap from the center due to either improper workpiece, tool setup or poor finish of the pilot holes. The inconclusive results observed above led to the investigating of the factors responsible for the poor finish of the pilot holes. The torque signals derived while threading taps for the 1st hole show tapping torque values of 8.7 Nm for the TiN coated tap and11.2 Nm for the uncoated and tap respectively. Thus, for the 1st hole, the TiN coated tap exhibits a 28% reduction in torque compared to the uncoated tap. While for the 8th hole the reduction in torque for the TiN coated tap is approximately 52% as compared to uncoated tap. Comparison of the torque signals at the initial phase and prior to breakthrough of the taps shows that the uncoated tap exhibits a sharper decrease in torque than the TiN coated tap. It can be said that, in the case of forming taps, work is evenly distributed at the scrape point during threading. A comparison of the torque results is summarized in Figure 3.3. Results indicate that tapping torque of the TiN coated tap is generally lower than those of the un-coated tap. 3.2 Comparison of Thread Forms The thread forms for the TiN coated and uncoated taps are shown in Figure 3.4. Magnified images of the axial cross-section of the formed threads at position No.①,②③ and ④ in holes and 1.4 and 8 were used in the comparison. Figure 3.4 is a model of the photographed threads at the various positions, while Figure 3.5 shows magnified images for hole No.8 As it can be seen from Figure 3.5, the thread profile at position No.① to ② of threads formed with the TiN coated tap show no abnormalities. On the contrary, with the uncoatedtaps the root shows irregularities at position No.① and ④ corresponding to the hole inlet and outlet. In order to validate the observations mentioned above, a detailed analysis was performed on holes No.① and ②. Results are summarized in Figure 3.6. Figure 3.6(a) and (b) give results for hole No.① and 8 at thread position No.① and ② respectively. As it can be observed in Figure 3.6(a), the tooth profile of the TiN coated is far superior to the uncoated tap. 3.3 Comparison of Work Hardening A comparative study was performed to investigate the magnitude of work hardening when using the TiN coated and uncoated taps to form threads. Results of this study are summarized in Figure 3.7. Tap No.1 of both tap types were used. Results for the TiN coated and uncoated tap are given in Figure 3.7(a) and (b) respectively. Hardness was measured on a hardness tester loaded with a 100 gw. The results show that the hardness of the TiN coated tapping thread is lower than the uncoated tapping thread. The above results show that the TiN coated tap is superior to the uncoated tap in the following aspects, thread form and work hardening etc,. 3.4Comparison of Tool Life The TiN coated and uncoated taps were used to investigate the performance level with respect to tool life of taps. Tests were repeatedly performed three times with each type of tap. The results are summarized in Figure 3.8. Thread gauge readings were evaluated using A, B values. The results indicate that the average number of thread holes before tool life limit is reached are uncoated X =13 and TiN coated tap X =49 hole tap. The tool life of the TiN coated tap is 3.8 times longer than that of uncoated tap. 3.5 Comparison of Tap Wear Figure 3.9 shows the tool wear of the various taps after threading in the experiments indicated in Figure 3.8. It should be noted that all the taps used for this comparison have already attained full tool life. TiN coated and uncoated taps are shown in Figure 3.9(a) and (b), respectively. It can be seen that the point of all the taps show tool wear. In addition, extensive wear can be observed at the boundary between the full thread form with the chamfer thread run-out of same 3～5 threads from the scrape point. A comparison of the TiN coated and the uncoated tap, as exemplified by the magnified point, shows that wear of the latter is more pronounced than the former. In the case of the TiN coated tap, an overlay of TiN coating can be observed at the tool wear zone. 4. Conclusions 4.1The tool life of the TiN coated tap was approximately 4 times longer than that of the uncoated tap. 4.2The TiN coated tap (for the 1st hole) exhibits 28% reduction in torque compared to the uncoated tap. 4.3The tooth profile of the thread produced by the TiN coated tap shows fewer irregularities than for the uncoated tap. 4.4 The hardness of the TiN coated tapping thread is lower than the uncoated tapping thread. 4.5From the above results, the TiN coated tap is superior to the uncoated tap in the following aspects, tool life, thread forms and work hardening etc,. References [1] WOLFGANGSTRACHE : Alternative Strategies for the Production of Threads in Aluminum-based SIC Reinforced Metal Matrix Composite (MMC) Alloy,1993. [2] Beitz.W : Dubbel-Taschhenbuch fuer den Maschinenbau. ISBN 3-540-52381-2, (1990), G15. 13