engineering solutions with coated abrasive technologyabrasive norton engineered engineered abrasives...

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES

Engineering Solutions With Coated Engineering Solutions With Coated Abrasive TechnologyAbrasive Technology

Engineered Abrasives Business

Norton Company

May20, 1999 Update


• Customer’s Performance CriteriaCustomer’s Performance Criteria• Manufacturer’s Belt AvailabilityManufacturer’s Belt Availability

– abrasive (substrate ground, life, other factors)– backing (flexibility, durability, water

resistance)– others (grinding aids, product flex, etc.)

• Past ExperiencePast Experience– Understanding the process– What has worked in the past?

• Trial and ErrorTrial and Error– generates waste – time consuming– optimum conditions seldom achieved

TRADITIONAL METHOD OF CHOOSING AN ABRASIVE:


• Change Abrasive Pattern to fit the Change Abrasive Pattern to fit the applicationapplication

• Use Internal Data to Optimize Process Use Internal Data to Optimize Process

• Map Abrasive Performance Prior to Map Abrasive Performance Prior to TestingTesting

• Minimize Trial and Error: Choose Minimize Trial and Error: Choose abrasive belt which will maximize abrasive belt which will maximize performance based on pre-determined performance based on pre-determined engineering dataengineering data

0.81 0.868 0.926 0.984 1.042 1.099 1.157 1.215 1.273 1.331 above

3D Contour Plot P500 vs Structured Abrasive

z=1.571-2.282e-4*x+0.005*y+1.148e-8*x*x+5.677e-6*x*y-7.883e-4*y*y

SPEED

PRES

SURE

6

10

14

18

22

26

30

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Norton Performance MappingNorton Performance Mapping

NEW APPROACH FOR CHOOSING AN ABRASIVE:

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES Engineering an Abrasive Belt to Customer NeedsEngineering an Abrasive Belt to Customer Needs

• Norton Engineered Abrasive System– What is an Engineered Abrasive?– What are the Performance Benefits?

• Norton Pattern Technology– Using a variety of patterns to best fit an application

• Norton Mapping and Performance Optimization– Using existing data on belt performance to optimize

operating conditions

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES Engineered Abrasives - Differences from Current C/AEngineered Abrasives - Differences from Current C/A

CONVENTIONAL (Mono-layer)

AGGREGATES -(Multi-layer but poor contact area control)

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES (Multi-layer with contact area controlwhich can be tailored to application)

Engineered vs. Aggregate vs. ConventionalEngineered vs. Aggregate vs. Conventional


Backing

Formulation (Abrasive, Resin, Grinding Aid) Pattern (Variable)

Components of an Engineered AbrasiveComponents of an Engineered Abrasive

Surface Functional Powder (Unique Blend of Grain and Grinding Aid)Surface Functional Powder (Unique Blend of Grain and Grinding Aid)

Surface is completely Surface is completely covered with abrasive covered with abrasive and grinding aidand grinding aid

(Pyramidal type pattern)(Pyramidal type pattern)


Thic

knes

s

Side View

Top View

PyramidsErosion

Thic

knes

s

Side View

Tri-helical

- Engineered Abrasives erode during grinding replacing dull grain tips with new ones

Engineered Abrasives - Differences from Current C/AEngineered Abrasives - Differences from Current C/A

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES Engineered Abrasives - AdvantagesEngineered Abrasives - Advantages

• Multi-layer Abrasive ParticlesMulti-layer Abrasive Particles - Continuous replacement of dulled abrasives with new abrasives - Prolonged life- Consistent surface finish throughout belt life

• Surface Functional PowderSurface Functional Powder - Blend of abrasives and grinding aids at the surface of the structures- Increase initial aggressiveness- Grinding aid immediately exposed to increase efficiency

and decrease grinding temperatures


AlO Cut vs. Time on Stainless Steel (4632 SFPM / 15 PSI)

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Time (seconds)

Cut

(gra

ms) Aggregate

Engineered Abrasive

Structured Abrasive

Conventional

Engineered Abrasives - P320 Equivalents (Cut vs. Time)Engineered Abrasives - P320 Equivalents (Cut vs. Time)

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES Engineered Abrasives - Life and Surface FinishEngineered Abrasives - Life and Surface Finish

0

20

60

100

140

180

P180 P220 P320 P400/500 P1200

Structured Abrasive

Engineered Tri-helical

Engineered Pyramid

Conventional

Total Cut: Ring Test (5000 SFPM / 15 PSI) Stainless Steel20 Minutes Grinding Time

40

32 29

37

39

33 34

40

31

30

25

31

13

14 14

189

89

8

- Stock Removal and Life is significantly increased over conventional abrasives while generating an equivalent finish


Ring Test - Avg. Grinding Temperature (5000 SFPM, 15 PSI)

Conventional

Structured Abrasive

NortonEngineered

Engineered Abrasives - Reduced Grinding Temperatures Engineered Abrasives - Reduced Grinding Temperatures

Grit Size

Avg.

Tem

p (d

egre

es F

)

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

P180 P220 P320 P500


• Increase in cut rate over conventional abrasivesIncrease in cut rate over conventional abrasives– Ability to remove conventional steps (See case study)– No sacrifice in surface finish

• Prolonged LifeProlonged Life – Several times the life of a conventional belt (generally

3 - 5 x)– More aggressive over entire belt life compared to

aggregate and conventional products

Engineered Abrasives - AdvantagesEngineered Abrasives - Advantages


NORTON ENGINEEREDNORTON ENGINEEREDABRASIVES:ABRASIVES:

ENGINEERING AENGINEERING APRODUCT FOR ALL CONDITONSPRODUCT FOR ALL CONDITONS

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES Engineered Abrasives - Pattern EffectEngineered Abrasives - Pattern Effect

• Grinding EquipmentGrinding Equipment– Contact Wheels, HP, Area of ContactContact Wheels, HP, Area of Contact

• Stock Removal RequirementsStock Removal Requirements• Temperature RequirementsTemperature Requirements• Surface Finish RequirementsSurface Finish Requirements• Wheel speedWheel speed• Applied PressureApplied Pressure

In any grinding or finishing application the following may affect the efficiency and quality of the process:

Research has shown that ABRASIVE PATTERN can be designed to optimize the results

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES Engineered Abrasives - Pattern EffectEngineered Abrasives - Pattern Effect

Conclusions:- Pattern has a distinct effect on performance under certain conditions

Grinding Data on X45 Engineered Abrasives 7475 SFPM @ 30 psi. on 304ss

Cut Rate vs Time

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6Minutes

Gra

ms/

30 s

econ

ds

Specific Energy vs Cumulative Cut

Coarse Pattern

Fine Pattern

-1.00E+02

1.00E+02

3.00E+02

5.00E+02

7.00E+02

9.00E+02

1.10E+03

1.30E+03

1.50E+03

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35Cum. Cut(grams)

Hp-

min

/in3Coarse Pattern

Fine Pattern


• Pattern has a clear effect on product performance depending on grinding pressures and speeds (next slides)

• Mapping will help determine which patterns will work best in specific applications

Tri-helicalTri-helical PyramidPyramid HexagonsHexagons

Engineered Abrasives - Pattern EffectEngineered Abrasives - Pattern Effect


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450Thickness (Microns)

Bea

ring

Are

a (%

)

Individual Pyramids)

Lines (Tri-helical)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 50 100 150 200 250Time (seconds)

Cut

(gra

ms)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Bea

ring

Are

a

Pyramid Cut

Pyramid B.A.

Tri-HelicalCut

Tri-helical BA

Cut & Bearing Area vs. Time(19 PSI on Carbon Steel)

Bearing Area Profile

- Bearing area profile affects cut profile- This type of profile can be tailored to particular applications

Engineered Abrasives - Pattern EffectEngineered Abrasives - Pattern Effect


Ring Tester (Stainless Steel)5000 SFPM, 16 PSI, 304 SS

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Coarse Medium Fine Very Fine

Gra

ms M

etal

Rem

oved

in

3 M

inut

es

Pattern

• Increasing contact points increases the initial cut

Engineered Abrasives - Pattern and Initial CutEngineered Abrasives - Pattern and Initial Cut


• Abrasive pattern has a strong effect on Abrasive pattern has a strong effect on grinding performancegrinding performance– dependant on grinding conditions

• Engineered Abrasives offer patterns to Engineered Abrasives offer patterns to cover a wide variety of operating conditionscover a wide variety of operating conditions

Engineered Abrasives - Pattern SummaryEngineered Abrasives - Pattern Summary


NORTON ENGINEEREDNORTON ENGINEEREDABRASIVES:ABRASIVES:

CHOOSING THE RIGHT PATTERNCHOOSING THE RIGHT PATTERNAND OPTIMIZING GRINDINGAND OPTIMIZING GRINDING

CONDITIONSCONDITIONS

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES Engineered Abrasives - MappingEngineered Abrasives - Mapping

• New method of mapping has been developed:New method of mapping has been developed:– can be used for both engineered and conventional abrasives– models performance as a function of wheel speed and pressure– specifies the region of optimal performance for a specific abrasive

belt• Mapping can help predict factors which may change as a Mapping can help predict factors which may change as a

function of the grinding conditions:function of the grinding conditions:– cut rate– surface finish– others


U464 X110 vs. Conventional 150 grit SiCDistance Weighted Least Squares

SPEED

PR

ES

SU

RE

6

10

14

18

22

26

30

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000

Mapping of Engineered Abrasive vs. Conventional AbrasiveMapping of Engineered Abrasive vs. Conventional Abrasive

Good

Best

Better

ENGINEERED ABRASIVES Surface Finish ChangesSurface Finish Changes

304 Stainless304 Stainless SteelSteel BrassBrass 1018 Carbon1018 Carbon

SteelSteelRa (mico-inch)Ra (mico-inch)@ 4000 SFPM@ 4000 SFPM

Ra (mico-inch)Ra (mico-inch)@ 7500 SFPM@ 7500 SFPM

(X65 Aluminum Oxide)

41

48 45

39

57

47

• Surface finish can be strongly affected by speed, pressure, grit size, etc.

• Mapping can help predict these types of changes to match the finish required by the customer


Process: Offhand polishing of Stainless Steel Irons (soles)

Initial Grinding Conditions:

Abrasive: Competitive Aluminum Oxide Structured Abrasive Belt Speed: 5500 SFPMContact Wheel: Matchless - A gradeForce Applied: 10 - 15 lbsContact Area: 0.375 in^2

WorkplacePressure: 26 psi - 40 psi

Results under initial Conditions:

Competitor: 120 - 130 parts/beltNorton U264 (X80): 95 - 100 parts/belt

Consult MappingConsult MappingFor conditionsFor conditions

to run!!to run!!

Mapping Case StudyMapping Case Study


U264 X80 vs. Structured Abrasive

Stainless Steel

SPEED

PRE

SSU

RE

6

10

14

18

22

26

30

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Condition where Condition where customer was running customer was running Structured AbrasivesStructured Abrasives

PreviousCondition

New conditionsNew conditionsspecified for specified for Norton BeltsNorton Belts

SuggestedCondition


Good

Best

Better


New Conditions: Requested operator to push with half the force(~ 13 - 16 psi)

Wheel speed and contact wheel unchanged

Results: - 44% increase in product life over competitor(188 parts vs. 130 max. for competitor)- cut rate and surface finish equivalent

Follow up: In this case, operators liked the “feel” of lower pressureIn other cases, a new pattern can be generated to performat higher pressures



Offhand Polish/Plate Carbon Steel Pipes

Automated PlungeGrind on ZincCastings

Offhand polishingof stainless steelgolf clubs (irons)

Robotic Polishingof prosthetic kneejoints

APPLICATION ENGINEERED PRODUCT RESULTS

20 - 30% increase inlife with equal cut rateand finer finish

COMPETITION

Structured AbrasiveAluminum Oxide

Structured AbrasiveAluminum Oxide 20 - 25% increase in life

200 - 250% more performance than conventional with lower grinding temperatures

Structured AbrasiveAluminum Oxide(Various Grit Sizes)

-66% increase in life (X45-X30)-More than double belt life!

Engineered Abrasive Testing and Results Engineered Abrasive Testing and Results

U266X30

U254X80

ConventionalP220 - J weight

U264X80

U254X45-X30

U264X16

Offhand Polishingof Stainless SteelCylinders

ConventionalP120, 240, 400

U264X45

Reduced process to one stepwith more uniform surfacefinish and lower temperatures


NORTON ENGINEEREDNORTON ENGINEEREDABRASIVESABRASIVES

PRODUCT OFFERINGPRODUCT OFFERING


ABRASIVE:ABRASIVE: ALUMINUM OXIDE (X100 - X6) SILICON CARBIDE (X110, X90, X70)

af

BACKINGS:BACKINGS: Flexible cotton (good combination of strength and flexibility) Semi-flexible polyester (versatile backing for dry and wet applications)

PATTERNS:PATTERNS: Tri-Helical (Middle to High Pressure Grinding - Very consistent cut rate) 35 Pyramid (Low Pressure Grinding - Extremely flexible) 16 Quad (Middle to High Pressure Grinding - Long life, consistent cut rate)

Current Product OfferingCurrent Product Offering

P150 P180 P220 P320 P400 P600 P800 P1200 P2500

X100

X80

X65

X45

X30

X16

X6

FEPA Grading

Engineered Abrasives perform over a wider range of traditional grit sequences


Example: U266

First Character: U - denotes “UV” curable product and distinguishes EngineeredAbrasive products from other CAP codes.

Second Character: 2 - same as conventional system, 2 = Aluminum Oxide, 4 = SiliconCarbide.

Third Character: 6 - refers to pattern, 6 = Tri-Helical, 5 = Pyramid Cell; 3 = Quad Cell

Fourth Character: 6 - refers to backing type, 6 = X polyester, 4 = X cotton

DESIGNATION KEY:DESIGNATION KEY:UVUV GrainGrain PatternPattern Backing TypeBacking Type

Cap Code DesignationCap Code Designation

engineering solutions with coated abrasive technologyabrasive norton engineered engineered abrasives...

Documents