固结磨料研磨K9玻璃亚表面损伤层深度测量方法研究  

Comparison of different methods to measure the subsurface damage depth of K9 glass lapped by fixed abrasive polishing pad

作　　者：戴子华[1] 朱永伟[1] 李军 高平[1] 左敦稳[1] 

机构地区：[1]南京航空航天大学机电学院,江苏省精密与微细制造技术重点实验室,南京210016

出　　处：《金刚石与磨料磨具工程》2014年第5期6-12,共7页Diamond & Abrasives Engineering

基　　金：国家自然科学基金(51175260);中央高校基本科研业务专项资金(NP2012506)

摘　　要：光学工件研磨后亚表面损伤层深度是确定其抛光加工余量的重要依据。采用三种典型的光学材料亚表面损伤层深度测量方法(BOE分步腐蚀法、BOE差动腐蚀法、磁流变抛光斑点法),测量比较了固结磨料研抛垫(FAP)研磨后K9玻璃的亚表面损伤层厚度;建立了亚表面损伤模型,分析比较测量误差产生的原因。结果表明:在实验条件下,BOE分步腐蚀法测量精度优于其他两种方法;BOE分步腐蚀法、磁流变抛光斑点法、BOE差动腐蚀法的测量精度分别约为0.1nm、17nm、200nm;亚表面损伤层总深度与其裂纹深度之间存在对数关系。determine the SSD d etching m The subsurface damage （SSD） depth of lapped optical parts is the important basis to the polishing allowance. There are three kinds of typical measurement methods to measure epth of optical glass （ buffer oxide etch （BOE） step-by step etching method, BOE differential ethod, magnetorheological polishing spot method）, Measuring and comparing the SSD depth of K9 glass lapped by fixed abrasive po ishing pad （FAP）, then building the model of SSD depth and exploring the connection between the surface crack layer depth with the damage layer depth of the material subsurface, analyzing and comparing the causes of measurement error. The results show that under the experimental conditions, the accuracy measured by BOE step-by-step corrosion method is better than the ones measured by the other two methods; the measuring accuracy of BOE step-by-step corrosion method, the magnetic rheological polishing spot method and BOE differential corrosion method respectively are about 0.1 nm, 17 nm and 200 nm ; There is a logarithmic relationship between the total depth of the subsurface damage layer and the crack depth.

关 键 词：亚表面损伤 研磨 BOE分步腐蚀法 BOE差动腐蚀法 磁流变斑点法 

分 类 号：TQ171.684[化学工程—玻璃工业]