Comparaison des outils Guhring et iscar dans le percage de composites a matrice d'aluminium

More than 75% of the parts in the car and aerospace industry have holes. The quality level of bored holes (several tens of thousands of holes) has a high cost which must be controlled. Thus the industrial manufacturers are obliged to invest in the development of new materials and also to check the manufacturing process of these new products. Among the new materials we can find the CMM that is a composite with metal matrix containing reinforced ceramics with aluminum particle. The reinforcement particles which improve the wearing resistance of this new composite use the cutting tools. There is a graphitic composite (GrA-Ni(RTM) containing an aluminum matrix reinforced with soft covered nickel graphite particles and hard particles of A1 2O3 or SiC.; During fabrication by turning or milling, the tool is placed outside the substance. On the other hand, for drilling, the tool is placed inside the material and the chips remain in the zone of cut and take part in the process of wear of the tool. For this process, the particle of reinforcement which improves the wear resistance of these new composites uses the cutting tools quickly. Because of this complexity, we need a careful study of each parameter of drilling and a quantitative comparison between them. This study is based on the comparison of the drills. There are two types of drilling tool, the twist drill and the plate type. Our drilling tests were carried out for these two tools: a solid carbide tool which represents the helicoids type and the tool with a removable head which represents in plate type. We chose two industrial examples, Guhring (for solid carbide) and Iscar (for the removable head) for our experiments. In general, the comparisons are quantitative and subjective, but in our work, we need a qualificative comparison. We want compare the tools in a specific context and our objective are to obtain all the important parameters of cut.; In the first stage, for each drill, we need to know what is used in every industry and the degree of importance of the elements of drilling. In our project, we studied the SME of the car industry. The second stage is to find the most stable zone of drilling to have the best output for the two drills. According to the study of Margarit (Margarit L April 2006), this stable zone is the combination of progress 0.2 mm/rev and speed 6000 rpm. For the third stage, we need a method for a qualifying comparison between the two drills Guhring and Iscar. To arrive at this objective, we chose the method Goal Question Metric (GQM). In order to find the relationship between the principle of quality and the parameters used in our experiment, we adopted for the first time the approach Goal Question Metric (GQM) (BASILI, 1992), which is a method used in other fields of science such as software engineering. We tried to quantify (define numerically) our definition of quality according to the measurable indicators (our parameters of drilling) to apply them within the framework of GQM. The advantage of GQM is that one can apply any parameter (for example the parameter of the price of the tool) in our evaluation of quality. In other words, we define quality in the form of a polynomial in which each measured parameter has a weight of importance. More specifically, we compare the numerically expressed attribute of quality of two tools according to its relationship with three secondary criteria (view as the questions of measurement): the quality of hole, price of the tool and the lifespan of the tool. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)...