Experimental analysis of the process parameters affecting bone burring operations

9Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The experimental quantification of the process parameters associated with bone burring represents a desirable outcome both from the perspective of an optimized surgical procedure as well as that of a future implementation into the design of closed-loop controllers used in robot-assisted bone removal operations. Along these lines, the present study presents an experimental investigation of the effects that tool type, rotational speed of the tool, depth of cut, feed rate, cutting track overlap, and tool angle (to a total of 864 total unique combinations) have on bone temperature, tool vibration, and cutting forces associated with superficial bone removal operations. The experimental apparatus developed for this purpose allowed a concurrent measurement of bone temperature, tool vibration, and cutting forces as a function of various process parameter combinations. A fully balanced experimental design involving burring trials performed on a sawbone analog was carried out to establish process trends and subsets leading to local maximums and minimums in temperature and vibration were further investigated. Among the parameters tested, a spherical burr of 6 mm turning at 15,000 r/min and advancing at 2 mm/s with a 50% overlap between adjacent tool paths was found to yield both low temperatures at the bone/tool interface and minimal vibrations. This optimal set of parameters enables a versatile engagement between tool and bone without sacrificing the optimal process outcomes.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kusins, J. R., Tutunea-Fatan, O. R., & Ferreira, L. M. (2018). Experimental analysis of the process parameters affecting bone burring operations. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine, 232(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954411917742943

Readers over time

‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24036912

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 7

58%

Researcher 3

25%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

17%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Engineering 10

67%

Medicine and Dentistry 2

13%

Nursing and Health Professions 2

13%

Computer Science 1

7%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0