Fractal characteristic evaluation and interpolation reconstruction for surface topography of drilled composite hole wall

Abstract

In this paper, an improved fractal interpolation model is proposed to reconstruct the surface topography of composite hole wall. This model adopts the maximum positive deviations and maximum negative deviations between the measured values and trend values to determine the contraction factors. Hole profiles in 24 directions are measured. Fractal parameters are calculated to evaluate the measured surface profiles. The maximum and minimum fractal dimension of the hole wall are 1.36 and 1.07, whereas the maximum and minimum fractal roughness are 4.05 × 10 ⁻⁵ and 4.36 × 10 ⁻¹⁰ m, respectively. Based on the two-dimensional evaluation results, three-dimensional surface topographies in five typical angles (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, and 165°) are reconstructed using the improved model. Fractal parameter D _s and statistical parameters Sa, Sq, and Sz are used to evaluate the reconstructed surfaces. Average error of D _s, Sa, Sq, and Sz between the measured surfaces and the reconstructed surfaces are 1.53%, 3.60%, 5.60%, and 9.47%, respectively. Compared with the model in published literature, the proposed model has equal reconstruction effect in relatively smooth surface and is more advanced in relatively rough surface. Comparative results prove that the proposed model for calculating contraction factors is more reasonable.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

surface topography / fractal evaluation / fractal interpolation / reconstruction / composite

References

[1] ZouP, Chen X M, ChenH. Damage propagation and strength prediction of a single-lap interference-fit laminate structure. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 2020, 15( 4): 558– 570

[2] HuiX Y, XuY J, ZhangW H. Multiscale model of micro curing residual stress evolution in carbon fiber-reinforced thermoset polymer composites. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 2020, 15( 3): 475– 483

[3] KuoC L, WangC Y, KoS K. Wear behaviour of CVD diamond-coated tools in the drilling of woven CFRP composites. Wear, 2018, 398‒399 : 1– 12

[4] HouG Y, QiuJ P, ZhangK F. Comparative tool wear and hole quality investigation in drilling of aerospace grade T800 CFRP using different external cooling lubricants. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2020, 106( 3‒4): 937– 951

[5] MaG F, KangR K, DongZ G. Hole quality in longitudinal–torsional coupled ultrasonic vibration assisted drilling of carbon fiber reinforced plastics. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 2020, 15( 4): 538– 546

[6] XuZ M, DingL T, HuangP. Interfacial potential barrier theory of friction and wear. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 2008, 3( 3): 276– 282

[7] BorodichF M, PepelyshevA, SavencuO. Statistical approaches to description of rough engineering surfaces at nano and microscales. Tribology International, 2016, 103 : 197– 207

[8] LiaoD R, ShaoW, TangJ Y. An improved rough surface modeling method based on linear transformation technique. Tribology International, 2018, 119 : 786– 794

[9] WaddadY, MagnierV, DufrénoyP. A multiscale method for frictionless contact mechanics of rough surfaces. Tribology International, 2016, 96 : 109– 121

[10] PawlusP, ReizerR, WieczorowskiM. Material ratio curve as information on the state of surface topography—A review. Precision Engineering, 2020, 65 : 240– 258

[11] PawlusP, ReizerR, ZelaskoW. Prediction of parameters of equivalent sum rough surfaces. Materials (Basel), 2020, 13( 21): 4898–

[12] MacekW, RozumekD, KrólczykG M. Surface topography analysis based on fatigue fractures obtained with bending of the 2017A-T4 alloy. Measurement, 2020, 152 : 107347–

[13] KacalakW, LipińskiD, SzafraniecF. Metrological basis for assessing the state of the active surface of abrasive tools based on parameters characterizing their machining potential. Measurement, 2020, 165 : 108068–

[14] NewtonL, SeninN, ChatzivagiannisE. Feature-based characterisation of Ti6Al4V electron beam powder bed fusion surfaces fabricated at different surface orientations. Additive Manufacturing, 2020, 35 : 101273–

[15] KrolczykG M, MarudaR W, KrolczykJ B. Parametric and nonparametric description of the surface topography in the dry and MQCL cutting conditions. Measurement, 2018, 121 : 225– 239

[16] ZhangF K, LiuJ H, DingX Y. Experimental and finite element analyses of contact behaviors between non-transparent rough surfaces. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 2019, 126 : 87– 100

[17] PawlusP, ReizerR, WieczorowskiM. Characterization of the shape of height distribution of two-process profile. Measurement, 2020, 153 : 107387–

[18] HouG Y, ZhangK F, FanX T. Analysis of exit-ply temperature characteristics and their effects on occurrence of exit-ply damages during UD CFRP drilling. Composite Structures, 2020, 231 : 111456–

[19] WernC W, RamuluM, ColliganK. A study of the surface texture of composite drilled holes. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 1993, 37( 1‒4): 373– 389

[20] RimpaultX, ChatelainJ, Klemberg-SapiehaJ E. Surface profile topography of trimmed and drilled carbon/epoxy composite. Procedia CIRP, 2016, 45 : 27– 30

[21] RimpaultX, ChatelainJ F, Klemberg-SapiehaJ E. Surface profile texture characterization of trimmed laminated composite in the stacking sequence direction. Measurement, 2016, 91 : 84– 92

[22] TomescuL. Surface profiles of composites with PTFE matrix. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2003, 143‒144 : 384– 389

[23] GantiS, BhushanB. Generalized fractal analysis and its applications to engineering surfaces. Wear, 1995, 180( 1‒2): 17– 34

[24] WangX B, ZhouT F, XieL J. Mesoscale fabrication of a complex surface for integral impeller blades. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 2017, 12( 1): 116– 131

[25] MiaoX M, HuangX D. A complete contact model of a fractal rough surface. Wear, 2014, 309( 1‒2): 146– 151

[26] ZhangT, DingK. Hierarchical fractal structure of perfect single-layer grapheme. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering, 2013, 8( 4): 371– 382

[27] MajumdarA, BhushanB. Role of fractal geometry in roughness characterization and contact mechanics of surfaces. Journal of Tribology, 1990, 112( 2): 205– 216

[28] MajumdarA, BhushanB. Fractal model of elastic–plastic contact between rough surfaces. Journal of Tribology, 1991, 113( 1): 1– 11

[29] YuanY, GanL, Liu K. Elastoplastic contact mechanics model of rough surface based on fractal theory. Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2017, 30( 1): 207– 215

[30] JanaT, MitraA, SahooP. Dynamic contact interactions of fractal surfaces. Applied Surface Science, 2017, 392 : 872– 882

[31] GoerkeD, WillnerK. Normal contact of fractal surfaces—Experimental and numerical investigations. Wear, 2008, 264( 7–8): 589– 598

[32] ZhangZ, XiaoY, XieY H. Effects of contact between rough surfaces on the dynamic responses of bolted composite joints: multiscale modeling and numerical simulation. Composite Structures, 2019, 211 : 13– 23

[33] PawlusP, ReizerR, WieczorowskiM. A review of methods of random surface topography modeling. Tribology International, 2020, 152 : 106530–

[34] XieH P, SunH Q, JuY. Study on generation of rock fracture surfaces by using fractal interpolation. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2001, 38( 32‒33): 5765– 5787

[35] RiS. A new idea to construct the fractal interpolation function. Indagationes Mathematicae, 2018, 29( 3): 962– 971

[36] RuanH J, XuQ. Fractal interpolation surfaces on rectangular grids. Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society, 2015, 91( 3): 435– 446

[37] MazelD S, HayesM H. Using iterated function systems to model discrete sequences. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 1992, 40( 7): 1724– 1734

[38] RiS. New types of fractal interpolation surfaces. Chaos, Solitons, and Fractals, 2019, 119 : 291– 297

[39] FengZ G, FengY Z, YuanZ Y. Fractal interpolation surfaces with function vertical scaling factors. Applied Mathematics Letters, 2012, 25( 11): 1896– 1900

[40] XuY, Jackson R L. Statistical models of nearly complete elastic rough surface contact-comparison with numerical solutions. Tribology International, 2017, 105 : 274– 291

[41] VakisA I, YastrebovV A, ScheibertJ. Modeling and simulation in tribology across scales: an overview. Tribology International, 2018, 125 : 169– 199

[42] ZhangS G, WangW Z, ZhaoZ Q. The effect of surface roughness characteristics on the elastic–plastic contact performance. Tribology International, 2014, 79 : 59– 73

[43] ZhangX L, WangN S, LanG S. Tangential damping and its dissipation factor models of joint interfaces based on fractal theory with simulations. Journal of Tribology, 2014, 136( 1): 011704–

[44] ZhangX H, XuY, Jackson R L. An analysis of generated fractal and measured rough surfaces in regards to their multi-scale structure and fractal dimension. Tribology International, 2017, 105 : 94– 101

[45] WangR Q, ZhuL D, ZhuC X. Research on fractal model of normal contact stiffness for mechanical joint considering asperity interaction. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 2017, 134 : 357– 369

[46] BrujicD, AinsworthI, RisticM. Fast and accurate NURBS fitting for reverse engineering. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2011, 54( 5–8): 691– 700

[47] KineriY, WangM, LinH. B-spline surface fitting by iterative geometric interpolation/approximation algorithms. Computer Aided Design, 2012, 44( 7): 697– 708

[48] WangJ, LuY, Ye L. Efficient analysis-suitable T-spline fitting for freeform surface reconstruction and intelligent sampling. Precision Engineering, 2020, 66 : 417– 428

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Intelligent Robotic in Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China (Grant No. 2017YFB1301703), the Young Fund of the Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province, China (Grant No. 2020JQ-121), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51975472), and the Innovation Capability Support Plan of Shaanxi Province, China (Grant No. 2019KJXX-063). Moreover, the authors acknowledge the editors and anonymous referees for their insightful comments.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2021 Higher Education Press 2021.