AJM

Mechanical Type AMPs: Abrasive Jet Machining (AJM) Dr. Neelesh K. Jain

ABRASIVE JET MACHINING (AJM)[1] PROCESS PRINCIPLE: A Focused Stream of High Velocity Abrasive Particles Laden in a Carrier Gas Coming

Out of a Nozzle Impinges on the Target Surface and Erodes it. The Impact Causes a Tiny Brittle Fracture and Carrier Gas Carries Away the Dislodged Small Workpiece Particle The Resulting Erosion can be Used for Cutting, Etching, Cleaning, Deburring, Polishing, Drilling The Process is More Suitable when Work Material is Brittle and FragileSoft & Resilient Materials (Rubber & Plastics) Resist Chipping Action and Cannot be Processed Effectively by AJM

AJM Differs from Conventional Sand Blasting Process in that the Finer Abrasive Particles and Carefully Controlled Cutting Action and Process Parameters

No Workpiece Chatter or Vibration Occurs Because Large Quantity and Small Mass of the Abrasives Result in Uniform Loading of the Part

AJM can Produce Fine, Intricate Details in Extremely Brittle Objects

Workpiece does Not Experience Any Thermal Damage


[2] AJM PROCESS EQUIPMENT: Main Elements of an AJM Machine are [1] Gas Propulsion System; [2] Metering System; [3] Delivery System; [4] Abrasive Collection System

[2.1] GAS PROPULSION SYSTEM:To Provide Steady Supply of Clean & Dry Gas Used to Propel the Abrasive ParticlesEither Bottled Gas or Air Compressor May be Used. Use of Air Compressor Requires Proper Line Filters to Avoid Water or Oil Contamination of Abrasive PowdersCommonly Used Gas: Nitrogen and Carbon Dioxide; Oxygen Must be Avoided Presents Fire Hazards.

[2.2] METERING SYSTEM:To Inject Uniform Adjustable Flow of Abrasive Particles into the Gas Stream Accomplished by Powder Hopper that Feeds the Abrasive Particles into a Vibrating Chamber that Causes the Powder to be Metered Uniformly into the Jet Stream

Abrasive Powder Flow Rate is Adjusted by Varying the Vibration Amplitude


[2.3] DELIVERY SYSTEM: Consists of Three Elements namely: Nozzles, Masks, and Abrasives[2.3.1] NOZZLES: One of the Most Vital Elements Controlling the Process Characteristics

Continuously in Contact with the Abrasive Particles Moving at High Speed, therefore Nozzle Material should be Very Hard to Avoid Significant Nozzle Wear

Nozzle Life is Defined by its Application. Exacting Operations (i.e. Cutting) Require Frequent Nozzle Changing than Etching or CleaningSTRAY CUTTING or OVERSPRAY: As the Nozzle Wears, the Jet Stream Tends to Diffuse Faster causing the Damage to the Work Material Outside the Intended Line of Cut

Rectangular Nozzle Create Less Overspray Compared to Round Nones

Sapphire Nozzles are Three to Eight Times More Expensive than Tungsten Carbide Nozzles CostNozzle LifeSizeConfigurationMaterial

Commonly Used Nozzles in AJM Process

~ 300 Hours~ 30 HoursRound: Diameter from 0.12 to 1.25 mm Rectangular: 0.07 x 0.5 mm to 0.17 x 3.8 mmRound onlyRound or RectangularSapphireTungsten Carbide


Mechanical Type AMPs: Ultra Sonic Machining (USM) Dr. Neelesh K. Jain

[3] SUMMARY of PROCESS CHARACTERISTICS and PARAMETERS of AJM PROCESS

Material: WC or Sapphire; Configuration/Shape: Round and Rectangular Orifice Area: 0.05 – 0.3 mm2

Nozzle Tip or Stand-Off Distance (NTD or SOD): 0.25 – 75 mm~ 0.8 mm (Cutting); 5 - 12.5 (Cleaning & Peening); 25-75 (Frosting)

Nozzle

MRR, Finish of the Cut, Geometry of Cut, and Nozzle Wear RateMeasures of Process Performance

Velocity of Abrasive Particles

Mean Diameter of Abrasive Grains

Mass Flow Rate of Abrasives

150 – 400 m/sA Minimum Value of Velocity (Known as Threshold or Critical Velocity) Exists that Depends on the Type of Abrasives and Work Material

Type: Dry Air, Co2 (Most Commonly Used), N2, He, N2O [Never Use O2]Pressure: 2 – 14 Bar; Velocity: 150-400 m/s; Quantity: 28 liter/min

Carrier Gas

1 – 30 g/min [0.0,000,167 – 0.0,005 kg/s]Critical Process Parameters

0.01 – 0.15 mm

Al2O3, SiC: For Cutting, Cleaning, Deburring Glass Beads: Matt Polishing and CleaningDolomite: Sodium Bicarbonate (Baking Soda): For Light Duty Applications such as Cleaning, Etching, Deburring of Soft Materials Abrasives are Not Reused

AbrasivesBrittle Fracture Caused by Impinging Abrasive Particles at High SpeedMechanism of Material Removal

Common Value/RangeParameter

[2.3.2] MASKS:To Control Overspray or To Produce Large Holes and Intricate Details Without the Nozzle and Tracing the ShapeMask is Produced with Areas Open where the Work Material is to be Removed. When AJM Stream is Passed Over the Exposed Areas, Cutting or Etching takes Place on the Selective Basis

Masks can be Fabricated from Rubber or MetalRubber Masks are Easier to Fabricate but Give Poor Edge Definition. Metal Masks Give Better Edge Definition but Erodes Faster


[2.4] ABRASIVE COLLECTION SYSTEM:To Maintain the Operator’s Exposure to Dusts within Permissible Limits Vacuum Dust Collector can be Used to Draw Dust Particles from the Exhaust Chamber and Keep Operator’s Viewing Clear

Special Considerations Must be Given to Dust Collection System Particularly if Toxic Materials Such as Beryllium are being Abraded



[4] MECHANISM and MODELING of MATERIAL REMOVAL in AJM: P. M. Khodke, and D. J. Tidke, “Abrasive Jet Machining - A State-of-art Review”, Journal of Institution of Engineer (India) 77 (1996) 1-8.

Normal Impingement P. K. Jain, A. K. Chitley, and N. K. Nagar (1990)

Normal Impingement K. N. Murthy,D. C. Roy, andP. K. Mishra (1986)

D. B. Marshall et al(1981)

ObliqueG. Sundararajan (1984)

Normal Impingement M. A. Moore andF. S. King (1980)

NormalI. M. Hutching (1981)

Normal Impingement M. L. Neema andP. C. Pandey (1977)

Experimental Values of 20 and 90 degrees

G.L. Sheldon andA. Kanhere (1972)

Normal Impingement P. K. Sarkar andP. C. Pandey (1976)

Any AngleJ. H. Neilson andA. Gilchrist (1968)

Normal Impingement B. R. Lawn (1975) Any AngleJ. G. A. Bitter (1963)

Normal Impingement G. L. Sheldon andI. Finnie (1966)

Non-OrthogonalI. Finnie (1960)

Impingement Angle of Abrasive Particles

Researcher (Year)

Impingement Angle of Abrasive Particles

Researcher (Year)

For Brittle MaterialsFor Ductile Materials

Ductile Materials: Due to Plastic Deformation and Cutting Wear, Plastic Strain and Deformation Wear. Brittle Materials: Due to Indentation Rupture, Elastic-Plastic Deformation, Critical Plastic Strain Theory, Radial Cracking and Propagation, Surface Energy Criterion


For brittle materials at normal impact.

Indentation M. L. NeemaP. C. Pandey[1977]

For brittle materials at normal impact.

Abrasive particles are spherical in shape.Each impact of abrasive produces spherical indentation whose volume equals the volume of the material removed per impact.

Rupture due to spherical indentation caused by the impact of abrasive particle.

P. K. SarkarP. C. Pandey [1976]

For brittle materials using fixed abrasive medium (ie particles are bonded to the tool).

Grit particles are ideally sharp.Geometrical similarity is preserved in the indentation fracture process.Residual stress field intensity about the deformation track is sufficiently high to drive the chip forming cracks to the surface.

Initiation and propagation of lateral cracks by residual stresses associated with incompatibility between deformation zone and surrounding elastic matrix.

B. R. Lawn [1975]

Only for erosive cutting of brittlematerials at normalimpact angle Difficult to predict the constant of proportionality as it involves many factors.

Abrasive particles are rigid.Impact is normal and dynamic effects may be neglected.Initial fracture starts when maximum tensile stress equals the tensile strength of material corresponding to size and stress distribution in the region exposed to tensile stress.Depth, up to which surface tensile stresses persist, is proportional to the indentation depth (constant of proportionality being K1). Zero probability failure stress and radial surface tensile stress vary in the same manner.

Brittle materials: propagation and intersection of cracks ahead and around cutting particle or tool.

G. L. SheldonI. Finnie[1966]

LimitationsAssumptionsMechanism of Material Removal

Investigator [Year]

[4.1] Summary of Material Removal Modeling for AJM Process for Brittle Materials


For brittle materials.Analysis is confined to elastic-plastic regime relevant to hard angular particles.

All the particles of same diameter impact the target with same velocity.Erosion rate is related to impact velocity & particle diameter by Impact velocity is related to particle diameter by

Particle size has logarithmic-normal type of distribution. Interaction effects are negligible i.e. volume removed by multiple impacts is the summation of volumes removed by individual impacts.

Semicircular radial mediancracks normal to the target surface for strength degradation,

Lateral cracks parallel to the target surface for material removal.

D.B. Marshall et al[1981]

For brittle materials.Comparison of predicted results of both the models with the experimental results shows considerable scatter.

Abrasive particles are 1200 right cones and act like scratch indentor with normal load being carried on leading half-cone surface.A contacting abrasive particle forms a groove by plastic deformation and a portion of this groove volume is removed from the surface.Number of abrasive particles contacting the surface per unit area is proportional to.Only a proportion of abrasive particles contacting the surface removes the material.

Plastic deformation and/or indentation fracture depending on the material and wear conditions.Practically material is removed by the combination of both mechanisms. Fracture mechanisms can cause ~ 10 times wear than plastic deformation,

M. A. Moore F. S. King [1980]


Investigator [Year]

[4.1] Summary of Material Removal Modeling for AJM Process for Brittle Materials (Continued)

211

na

n vdk)d(e =

onsst conditierosion teics of aracteristd x are chwhere a an;adv x

a =


Not able to explain the decrease in flow rate of air-abrasive mixture with increase in working pressure.Effect of pressure on MRR does NOT agree with the experimental results reported by Sarkar and Pandey.Type of work, abrasive materials, and velocity of impact has NOT been mentioned so the assumption of brittle material behaving as ductile cannot be justified.

Abrasive grains are identical spheres.Abrasive particles are assumed to be inelastic while workpiece as rigid perfectly plastic.Velocity of abrasive grains is same as that of the carrier gas due to small grain size.Normally brittle materials have been assumed to behave in ductile manner for high velocity erosion.Hertz equations are valid for fine abrasive particles.Volume of material removed is approximately proportional to the plastically deformed material.

Plastic deformation of surface layer due to impact of abrasive particles.

P. K. Jain A. K. ChitleyN. K. Nagar[1990]

There is discrepancy between theoretically predicted (=1.2) and experimentally found (=3) value of the velocity exponent.Velocity and angle of impact of all the particles will not be the same as assumed.All particles will not remove material.

Abrasive particles are blunt spheres of same average size.Normal impact of abrasive particle causes hemispherical shape of target material to be removed.Velocity of abrasive particles is one third of calculated velocity of the carrier gas.All particles equally participate in material removal and craters formed do not interact.KE of impacting particle is transformed in elastic strain energy of work material after impact.

Brittle fracture due to indentation at different impact sites.

K. N. MurthyD. C. RoyP. K. Mishra[1986]


Investigator [Year]

[4.1] Summary of Material Removal Modeling for AJM Process for Brittle Materials (Continued)


Applicable for ductile materials up to impact velocities of 450 m/sec.The relation is not completely fundamental in the nature as it is based on the empirical hardness relation of Meyer.Experimental value of hardness exponent is not well established and need further investigation.

Amount of material removed is related to the depth of the penetration of the particle.Effects of strain hardening, and inertia of the target material, and deformation of the abrasive particles have been neglected.For low velocities and normal impacts Meyer's hardness relation is valid (i.e. F = a hn ; where 'a' is the load for unit diameter and can be replaced by Hvw.

Flow of material around cavity by advancing particle and breaking of the displaced material due to sufficient strain.

G.L. Sheldon andA. Kanhere[1972]

Not explicitly mentioned. Brittle: Cracking and spalling,Ductile: Both cutting and deformation wear.

J. H. Neilson,A. Gilchrist[1968]

Complicated.Abrasive particles are spherical in shape.Colliding abrasive particles deform elastically while work surface deforms elastically and plastically.No deformation hardening i.e. σe is constant.

By cutting wear in case of ductile materials at smaller angle of impact.By deformation wear in case of brittle materials and ductile materials at higher impact angles.

J. G. A. Bitter [1963]

Applicable for impact of ductilematerials at smaller impact angles only because it underestimates the erosion at higher and normal impact angles.Value of 'φ' cannot be measured directly.

Abrasive particle is harder than the work surface.Ratio of vertical to horizontal force component acting on particle face (φ) is a constant.Ratio of contact length to depth of cut (ψ) is a constant.Particle cutting face is of uniform width and is large compared to depth of cut. Constant plastic flow stress is reached immediately after impact.

Ductile materials: Plastic deformation and fracture,Brittle materials:Intersection of cracks radiating from point of impact.

I. Finnie [1960]


Investigator [Year]

[4.2] Summary of Material Removal Modeling for AJM Process for Ductile Materials


For ductile materials.Relation for volume removal is empirical.The equation is valid for oblique impacts, (i.e. 60o) of ductile materials.

Abrasive particles are spherical.Impacts are oblique.Deceleration of the impacting particle in horizontal direction is dependent on the friction force only while that in vertical direction it is dependent on normal load only [for the model of Ratner and Styller].

Lateral and/or radial cracking and their interlinkages.

G. Sundararajan(1984)

For the erosion of ductilematerials at normal impacts. Factor cannot be measured directly.Effects of strain hardening and variations in strain rate with particle size and velocity have not been considered.No account of precise mechanism of material removal

Eroded material is rigid perfectly plastic with no strain hardening, while eroding particles are rigid non-deforming spheres.Target material resists indentation with a constant pressure i.e. dynamic hardness.Elastic forces are negligible.All initial KE of particle is available for indentation.Whole volume plastically deformed by each impact is subjected to the same amount of plastic strain increment, which is directed radially outward in the plane of target surface. A fraction of indentation volume is plastically deformed.

Platelet mechanismin which flat disc shaped platelets are detached from the surface after many cycles of plastic deformation when plastic strain attains a critical value.

I. M. Hutching (1981)


Investigator [Year]

[4.2] Summary of Material Removal Modeling for AJM Process for Ductile Materials (Continued)


)( vn MRRVolumetric

D Particle Abrsive an of Impact per Removed MaterialWork of Volumev

;)mm(MPa or N/ material workpiecegth of theFlow Strenσ;cle (mm/s)sive particting abraf the impaVelocity ov

)( ρd

M6 SurfaceWork the StrikingParticles Abrasive of Numbern

)(kg/mmParticles Abrasive Density ofρcesshining proion or macn the eroscipating ively parties effective particl of abrasiProportionη

/s);ticles (kgrasive parrate of abMass flow M

Particle Abrasive of DiameterdnIndentatio of DiameterD

Depth nIndentatioh

aa

fw

a

a

aa

3a

a

a

261

21

1

3

2

3

η

π

π

=

==

==

==

===

===

•

•

[4.3] MRR Model of SARKAR & PANDEY (1976): P. K. Sarkar, P. C. Pandey, “Some investigation on abrasive jet machining”, J. of Institution of Engineers (India) 56(6) (1976) 284-287.

Assumptions:Abrasive particles are spherical in shape.Each impact of abrasive produces spherical indentation whose volume equals the volume of the material removed per impact. For Brittle Materials at Normal Impingement of Abrasive Particles

Mechanism of Material Removal: Rupture due to spherical indentation caused by the impact of abrasive particle.


( )

( )

( )smm vM

ρση

0.0035 MRRGives ng Simplifyiand 4 Eq. in h gSubsitutin

x

dvh

dh hD vd

nIndentatio an Producing in Done Work the to Particle Abrasive Impacting an ofEnergy Kinetic the Equatingby Evaluated be can Depth nIndentatio

)( ρd

M6dhMRR

2 in 3 and 1 Eq. Using)( dh2D

d very small is h ,SincehdhD hddD

hdd2D

instantany at SurfaceWork the on Particle Abrasive SphericalRigid, a of Impact due caused nIndentatio the gConsiderinby destablishe be can d Particle Abrasive of Diameter

andD,nIndentatioof Diameter,hDepthnIndentatio between ipRelationsh The

31.5aa0.25

a0.75fw

a

fw

aa

fwfwaa

aa

a

•

•

=

=⇒

=

=

=

≈

−=⇒−−=⇒

−−

=

σρ

σπσρπ

ηπ

π

3

232323

323

22222

222

1012

104

1062

1

432

3

44222


Deformed;lasticallywhich is Pn Volume, IndentatioAmount of ζ);r N/mmial (MPa oWork Materrdness of Dynamic HaH

l;rk Materiality of Wosion Ductiain or Erolastic StrCritical Pδ);mmkgrial ( Work MateDensity ofρ

Where,s

mm v MρHδ

ρ ζ01.0436 x 1MRR

2dw

cw

3w

33aa0.5

a1.5dw

2cw

w-6

====

=

•

[4.4] MRR Model of I. M. Hutching (1981): I. M. Hutching, “A Model for the Erosion of Metals by Solid Particles at Normal Incidence”, Wear 70 (1981) 269-281.

Assumptions: For the Erosion of Ductile Materials at Normal Impingement of Abrasive ParticlesEroded Material is Rigid Perfectly Plastic with No Strain Hardening, While Eroding Particles are Rigid Non-deforming Spheres.Target Material Resists Indentation with a Constant Pressure i.e. Dynamic Hardness.Elastic Forces are Negligible.All Initial Kinetic Energy of Particle is Available for Indentation.Whole Volume Plastically Deformed by Each Impact is Subjected to the Same Amount of Plastic Strain Increment, Which is Directed Radially Outward in the Plane of Target Surface. A Fraction of Indentation Volume is Plastically Deformed

Mechanism of Material Removal: Platelet mechanism in which flat disc shaped platelets are detached from the surface after many cycles of plastic deformation when plastic strain attains a critical value.


[5] PARAMETRIC ANALYSIS: Important Process Parameters of AJM are 1. Related to Abrasives: Type, Size, Flow Rate, and Concentration (Mixing Ratio)2. Related to Carrier Gas: Type, Pressure3. Related to Nozzle: Shape, Size, SOD or NTD, Jet Velocity, and Wear Characteristics

[5.1.1] Effect of Abrasive Size (d): Finer Grains are Less Irregular in Shape Hence Possess Lesser Cutting Ability. Finer Grains have more Tendency to Stick Together and Choke the Nozzle

Coarse Grains Cutting; Finer Grains Polishing and Deburring, etc.Finer Abrasive Grains can Cake in the Storage Tank and can Reduce Abrasive Mass Flow Rate. While Oversize Particles can Clog the Nozzle. Best Results are Achieved Using Grain Size in 15 – 40 µ Range.


Mass Flow Rate of Abrasive Particles Depends on the Pressure and Mass Flow of Carrier Gas as Shown in the FigureAs Abrasive Mass Flow Rate Increases, the MRR also Increases as More Abrasive Become Available for Cutting. But it also Increases the Abrasive Concentration which in Turn Lowers the Velocity of Abrasive Particles and Tend to Reduce the MRR. As a Combined Effect of it MRR Starts Decreasing After a Certain Value of Abrasive Mass Flow Rate

[5.1.2] Effect of Mass Flow Rate and Concentration or Mixing Ratio of Abrasives

•

aM :)MM

M(

aira

a••

•

+=α


[5.2.1] Effect of Carrier Gas Pressure (P): The Composition and Pressure of the Carrier Gas Affects its Velocity and Velocity of the Gas-Abrasive Stream.

MRR Increases with Increasing Gas Pressure at a Decreasing Rate and Tends to Saturate Beyond a Certain Value. The Critical Pressure Limit Depends on the Mixing Ratio. Higher Mixing Ratio Requires Higher Pressure to Reach Sonic Velocity. Higher Pressure Reduces the Nozzle Life


[5.3.1A] On Abrasive Jet Velocity Figure 1 Shows that Velocity of Abrasive Particles Lags Sufficiently Behind with that of Carrier Gas Velocity.

As Shown in the Figure 2, the Carrier Gas Attains the Maximum Velocity at the Nozzle Exit and Starts Decreasing with Increasing SOD, While Abrasive Particles Continue to Accelerate in the Jet Region and Attains Maximum Velocity at Certain SOD (No Slip Condition) and then Starts Decreasing. For Normal Impingement of Abrasive Particles, the Ductile Material Shows Lower MRR than Brittle Materials for Same Velocity, but this Trend Reverses after a Certain Velocity [Figure 3]

:)v( a

[5.3.1] Effect of Nozzle Tip Distance (NTD) or Stand Off Distance (SOD):


[5.3.1B] On MRR: MRR Increases with an Increase in SOD till the Abrasive Particles Attains the Maximum Velocity from the Nozzle Exit. Afterwards MRR Starts Decreasing thus Giving an Optimum Value of SOD/NTD. This Pattern of Curve is Essentially due to Inertia Effects of the Suspended Particles.


[5.3.1C] On Accuracy of Cut or Shape and Size of Cut: Accuracy of the Cut Decreases as the SOD Increases due Spreading of the Jet.


[6] APPLICATIONS of AJM PROCESS

[6.1] MATERIALS APPLICATIONS:Brittle Metals: Metals with BCC Structure such as W, V, Cr, Ta, Mo, etc. ;

Metals with HCP Structure such as Ti, Be, Co, Zr, Be, Cd, Semiconductors: Operations such as Cutting, Drilling, Cleaning, Dicing, Beveling, Thinning can be done Accurately on Semiconductors such as Silicon, Germanium, Gallium, etc. Alloys: SuperalloysCeramics: Glass, Quartz, Refractories, Insulators, Mica, etc.Polymers: Plastics [Thermoplastics such as Nylon, Teflon], Rubber Stencils

[6.2] SHAPE APPLICATIONS: Abrading and Frosting: AJM is Quicker than Acid Etching or Grinding Making Threads on Glass RoodsDrilling Glass BaffersCutting: Cutting of Titanium FoilResistor Adjustment: AJM can Precisely Adjust Deposited and Wire-wound Resistors Through Accurate and Controlled Removal of Conductive Material. Cutting is Faster and Gives Clean and Accurate PathMicro-Module Fabrication: Abrasive Jet Cutting can Change Conductive Paths, Adjust Resistance or Capacitance, or Shape Ceramics PreciselyCleaning: Can be Used for Safe Removal of Metallic Smears on Ceramics, Oxides on Metals, Resistive Coatings, etc. from the Parts too Delicate to Withstand Manual Scrapping or Powder GrindingIn Electrical Mfg. AJM can be Used to Remove Potting Material from Leads, Varnish from Potentiometer, etc.Deburring: AJM can Remove Fine Burrs Faster and More Completely than Hand Filing Methods in Difficult-to-Reach Areas of Aerospace, Medical, and Computer Equipments. Miscellaneous Metal Working Application: AJM can be Used to Drill and Cut Thin Sections of Hardened Metal; Apply Trade Names to Parts; Remove Chrome, Corrosion, Contaminants , Anodized Finish from Small Areas; to Produce Matt Finish Deflashing Small Castings:GroovingMarkingTrimmingEngravingEtchingPolishing Testing Abrasion Resistance of Various Materials


Figures Showing Various Applications of AJM Process


[8] ADVANTAGES and LIMITATIONS of AJM PROCESS[8.1] ADVANTAGES:

Can Machine Very Hard, Heat Sensitive, and Fragile MaterialsLow Capital Cost i.e. One of the Least Expensive Non-Traditional Processes Shockless Cutting Action by Abrasive Jet No Part Chatter or Vibration Good for Difficult-to-Reach Areas

[8.2] LIMITATIONS: Stray CuttingLow MRRTaper Short Nozzle Standoff when Used for CuttingParticles can Imbed into Workpiece


[7] SUMMARY of PROCESS CAPABILITIES and OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS of AJM PROCESS

No ProblemToxicity

MediumPower Consumption CostLowTooling and Fixtures Cost

Normal Problem Contamination of Machining Medium

Normal ProblemSafety Environmental Aspects

Medium Tool WearTool Consumption Cost

Very LowInitial Investment or Capital Cost Economic Aspects

Data UnavailableRange of Cutting Rate (mm/min)1.5 – 6.3Thickness of Cut (mm)2.5 Width of Cut (mm)Cutting

Capabilities

1.0 – 6.3Hole Depth (mm)0.1 – 2.5Aspect Ratio

Not PossibleMaximum No. of Holes that can be Drilled Simultaneously5.0Minimum Taper (µm /mm)

Thermal DamageMechanical DamageChemical Damage

90oMinimum Angle of Inclination Hole Axis with Surface

2.5 - 10Hole Diameter (mm)Drilling Capabilities

No2.5NoMinimum Surface

Damage (µm)

Depends on Stand Off Distance Minimum Overcut (mm)0.2Minimum Corner Radii (mm)50 – 125 Dimensional Tolerance or Accuracy [± µm]0.2 – 0.8 Surface Roughness [CLA in µm]Finishing

Capabilities

Common Value/RangeCapability/Characteristics Type

Documents

AJM