2021
DOI: 10.3390/mi12111293
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental Optimization of Process Parameters in CuNi18Zn20 Micromachining

Abstract: Ultraprecision micromachining is a technology suitable to fabricate miniaturized and complicated 3-dimensional microstructures and micromechanisms. High geometrical precision and elevated surface finishing are both key requirements in several manufacturing sectors. Electronics, biomedicals, optics and watchmaking industries are some of the fields where micromachining finds applications. In the last years, the integration between product functions, the miniaturization of the features and the increasing of geome… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The examination of these results, firstly permitted to individuate which medical applications, that are surface roughness dependent [14], are suitable for MM. The choice of analyzing the S a three-dimensional roughness parameter (ISO 25178) instead of the R a one, was related to a lower influence of measurement noise and scratches on S a than R a [20] and to a characterization of the height distribution in combination with spatial parameter that led to an improved description of implant surfaces [14,21]. Secondly, following the need of standardizing evaluation and methodology techniques [14], S a values were statistically investigated by ANOVA to identify the most influencing parameters, letting the development of reliable mathematical models for S a estimation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The examination of these results, firstly permitted to individuate which medical applications, that are surface roughness dependent [14], are suitable for MM. The choice of analyzing the S a three-dimensional roughness parameter (ISO 25178) instead of the R a one, was related to a lower influence of measurement noise and scratches on S a than R a [20] and to a characterization of the height distribution in combination with spatial parameter that led to an improved description of implant surfaces [14,21]. Secondly, following the need of standardizing evaluation and methodology techniques [14], S a values were statistically investigated by ANOVA to identify the most influencing parameters, letting the development of reliable mathematical models for S a estimation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Contingently from the implant typology, roughness needs are different, and can range from values smaller than a micron up to few microns of the parameters Sa [15]. Sa parameter is usually considered instead of the Ra one since less influenced by scratches and measurement noise [16]. Beyond roughness, there are other functional parameters, such as fatigue, wear, and corrosion resistance, to be taken into account for guaranteeing implant permanence inside human body [17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%