Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A comparative analysis of machining parameters influence on accuracy and roughness in Waterjet and laser cutting

  • Azet-flex

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

The paper presents a comparative analysis of the technique of cutting materials such as water jet cutting and laser cutting. The tests were carried out while cutting plastic elements, such as: PMMA, HIPS and ABS. To compare the analysed cutting methods, it was necessary to limit the type of material to be cut to the selected plastics due to the limited thickness range of the samples cut with the use of the laser used for the tests. The workpiece was designed in AutoCAD. The geometry was designed in such a way that it was possible to compare the accuracy of cutting both straight sections, curves and holes using the cutting techniques tested. The roughness of the treated surfaces (edges of the samples) was also analysed. A roughness gauge was used to test the edges. The obtained research results were compiled and analysed to determine the optimal technology and parameters of cutting processes for individual types of selected materials and shapes. As it was shown, the wrong selection of the cutting technology in relation to the processed material or the wrong selection of machining parameters may lead to the destruction of the detail being made and incur significant costs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)134-142
Number of pages9
JournalInternational Journal of Modern Manufacturing Technologies
Volume13
Issue number3 Special Issue
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2021

Keywords

  • Analysis
  • Laser cutting
  • Processing parameters
  • Roughness
  • Surface quality
  • Waterjet cutting

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comparative analysis of machining parameters influence on accuracy and roughness in Waterjet and laser cutting'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this