熔石英元件磁性复合流体抛光去除特性研究  

Characterization of magnetic composite fluid polishing removal of fused silica elements

作　　者：叶卉[1] 李壮 王健[1] 姜晨[1] 孙来喜[2] YE Hui;LI Zhuang;WANG Jian;JIANG Chen;SUN Laixi(School of Mechanical Enginnering,University of Shanghai for Science and Technology,Shanghai 200093,China;Research Center of Laser Fusion,China Academy of Engineering Physics,Mianyang 621900,China)

机构地区：[1]上海理工大学机械工程学院,上海200093 [2]中国工程物理研究院激光聚变研究中心,四川绵阳621900

出　　处：《红外与激光工程》2024年第7期214-225,共12页Infrared and Laser Engineering

基　　金：国家自然科学基金项目(62305221,62175222);长三角科技创新共同体联合攻关重点专项(2022CSJGG1302);机械系统与振动国家重点实验室项目(MSV202315)。

摘　　要：基于磁性复合流体(Magnetic Compound Fluid,MCF)抛光技术开展了熔石英元件抛光工艺研究,对比了传统MCF和超声辅助MCF(以下简称UMCF)抛光对熔石英材料去除特性的影响,探究了不同抛光时间下MCF和UMCF抛光对熔石英材料去除量/去除率和表面粗糙度的影响,并构建了与抛光应力和抛光时间有关的材料去除率模型。研究结果表明,相较于传统MCF,UMCF在提高材料去除率和降低表面粗糙度方面均有优势。两种抛光方式下材料去除机制均为弹塑性去除,UMCF抛光获得的表面粗糙度相比于MCF抛光优化了68.88%。由于流体动压力和超声振动压力的联合作用,UMCF抛光材料去除率最高可达5.74×10^(-3)mm^(3)/min,相比于MCF抛光提升了4.04倍。MCF和UMCF抛光材料去除率与抛光应力和抛光时间均呈现幂函数相关性,且在UMCF抛光中抛光应力对去除率的影响权重大于MCF抛光。Objective Utilizing magnetic compound fluid(MCF) polishing technology, a comprehensive study was conducted on the polishing process of fused quartz components. The aim was to compare the removal characteristics of fused quartz materials when subjected to traditional MCF and ultrasound-assisted MCF(UMCF)polishing. This comparison aimed to assess the impact of both MCF and UMCF polishing on the removal amount/removal rate of fused quartz materials and surface roughness across various polishing durations. A material removal rate model was formulated, incorporating the effects of polishing stress and duration.Methods The polishing characteristics of MCF and UMCF at different times were investigated by five-axis polishing and processing machine tool equipment(Fig.1), the polishing spot cross-section profile test was analyzed on the polished optical components using a surface profiler(Fig.3), and the surface morphology of the processed components was analyzed using a metallurgical microscope and roughness tester(Fig.6).Results and Discussions The findings of the study reveal that UMCF significantly outperforms traditional MCF in terms of material removal rate enhancement and surface roughness reduction. Both polishing methods operate on the principle of elastoplastic removal. Notably, UMCF achieved a remarkable 68.88% improvement in surface roughness compared to MCF. Attributed to the synergistic effect of hydrodynamic pressure and ultrasonic vibration pressure, the material removal rate of UMCF reaches an impressive 5.74×10^(-3) mm^(3)/min, surpassing MCF by a factor of 3.04. Furthermore, the material removal rates of both MCF and UMCF exhibit a power function relationship with polishing stress and duration. Notably, the influence of polishing stress on the removal rate is more pronounced in UMCF compared to MCF.Conclusions With the same polishing time, UMCF polishing rather than MCF polishing can be obtained by the greater length, width and depth of the polishing spot. And with the increase in polishing time, MCF po

关 键 词：磁性复合流体抛光 超声振动辅助 材料去除率 粗糙度 抛光应力 

分 类 号：TH145.1[一般工业技术—材料科学与工程]