Tula State University (Tula, Russia):

A. S. Yamnikov, Dr. Eng., Prof., Chair of Manufacturing Technology, e-mail: yamnikovas@mail.ru
A. A. Malikov, Dr. Eng., Prof., Head of the Chair of Manufacturing Technology
O. S. Kashmin, Cand. Eng., Associate Prof., Chair of Manufacturing Technology

TTS Translation and Software Agency (Tula, Russia):
D. I. Troitsky, Cand. Eng., Associate Prof., Director

In small arms manufacturing the lock dimensional chain final link precision is secured with manual file fitting and removing the tolerance intentionally left on the recoil lugs. The manual process reduces the contact stiffness of the lock components, and the final link dimension (between the cylindrical gauge end that simulates a cartridge, and the breeching lock face) set during the assembly is distorted when the breech lock components are exposed to shot impact loads. For this reason, the cylindrical cartridge dummy used for the initial assembly is sized to allow for subsequent plastic deformation at the breech lock component interfaces. The deformation value is determined experimentally on an ad hoc basis. The study shows that the plastic deformation value depends of the force applied to the interface surfaces, and on the loaded contact area. The area, in its turn, depends on the physical and chemical properties of the interface materials and the surface finish (roughness, undulation, geometric shape precision.) Polynomial expressions have been obtained experimentally for the interface plastic deformation vs. relative positioning errors and surface finish relation for parts made of typical military steel grades. To study the relation between the interface surface machining methods and contact stiffness flat specimens, 50RA steel quenched to HRC 40–45 (the roughness RZ is 10–15 μm) were machined as follows: peripheral pregrinding; flank milling; file crosswise (at 45°) movements. The results and curves generated after processing the measurements made with a HOMMEL TESTER W55 instrument show that finish flank milling yields the best results.

1. Gryazev V. M., Yamnikov A.S. Methodical bases of the solution of dimension chains with norm of soot surface contact. European Science and Technology. 2012. October 30^th – 31^st. Vela Verlag Waldkraiburg. Munich – Germany. Vol. I. pp.161–168.
2. Kazakov K. E., Kurdina S. P., Manzhirov A. V. Contact Interaction Between Surface Inhomogeneous Foundations and systems of Rigid Punches. Procedia IUTAM. 2017. Vol. 23. pp. 201–209.
3. Vasiliev A. S., Gryazev V. M. Surface Layer Property Estimation for Various Parts Machining Processes. Fundamentalnye i prikladnye problemy tekhniki i tekhnologii. 2012. No. 2–5 (292). pp. 3–6.
4. Vasiliev A. S., Gryazev V. M., Yamnikov A. S. Functionally Dependent Assembly Dimensional Chains Ensuring the Required Surface Contact. Sborka v mashinostroenii, priborostroenii. 2012. No. 5. pp. 3–6.
5. Bazrov B. M., Suslov A. G., Taratynov O. V., Shoev A. N. Quality of Surface Modules in Machine Parts. Russian Engineering Research. 2013. Vol. 33. No. 11. pp. 651–654.
6. Liu Ting, Cao Yanlonga, Wang Jingb, Yang Jiangxin. Assembly Error Calculation with Consideration of Part Deformation. Procedia CIRP. 2016. Vol. 43. pp. 58–63.
7. Gavankar P., Bedworth D. Stacked Tolerance Analysis and Allocation Using Assembly Models. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. 1991. December. Vol. 2. Issue 6. pp. 365–377.
8. Biplab Chatterjee and Prasanta Sahoo. Effect of Strain Hardening on Elastic-Plastic Contact of a Deformable Sphere against a Rigid Flat under Full Stick Contact Condition. Advances in Tribology. 2012, Article ID 472794. 8 pages. DOI: 10.1155/2012/472794.
9. Söderberg R., Wickman C., Lindkvist L. Improving Decision Making by Simulating and Visualizing Geometrical Variation in Non-Rigid Assemblies. CIRP Annals. 2008. Vol. 57. Issue 1. pp 175–178.
10. Samper S., Giordano M. Taking into Account Elastic Displacements in 3D Tolerancing: Models and Application. Journal of Materials Processing Technology. 1998. Vol. 78 (1). pp. 156–162.
11. Yamnikov A. S., Yamnikova O. A., Kashmin O. S. Empirical Relations for Contact Part Approach Values under Impulse Loads. Manufacturing and Instrument Production Assembly Processes. 2015. No. 3. p. 42.
12. Neville K., Lee S., Grace Yu., Joneja A., Ceglarek D. The Modeling and Analysis of a Butting Assembly in the Presence of Workpiece Surface Roughness and Part Dimensional Error. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 2006. December. Vol. 31. Issue 5–6. pp. 528–538.
13. Shi X., Polycarpou A. A. Measurement and Modeling of Normal Contact Stiffness and Contact Damping at the Meso Scale. ASME J. Vib. Acoust. 2005. Vol. 127. pp. 52–60.
14. Demkin N. B., Ryzhov E. V. Surface Quality and Part Contact. Moscow : Mashinostroenie. 1981. 244 p.
15. Dalskiy A. M., Kuleshova Z. G. High Precision Assembly. Moscow : Mashinostroenie. 1988. 304 p.
16. Demkin N. B. Rough Surface Contacts. Moscow : Nauka. 1970. 27 p.
17. Tskhai E. B., Klopotov A. A., Kozyreva R.A. Surface Roughness for Various Part Applications: Course and Final Project Guidelines. Izdatelstvo Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo arkhitekturnostritelnogo universiteta. 2015. 28 p.
18. Radchik V. S., Ben-Nissan B., Muller W. H. Semi-graphical Methods for the Calculation of Real Areas of Loaded Contact by Means of the Abbott-Firestone Bearing Curve. Trans. ASME. J. Tribol. 2002. No. 1. Vol. 124. pp. 223–226.
19. Abbott E. J. and Firestone F. A. Specifying Surface Quality a Method Based on Accurate Measurement and Comparison. ASME Journal of Mechanical Engineering. 1933. vol. 55. pp. 569–572.
20. Ryzhov E. V., Suslov A. G., Fedorov V. P. Manufacturing for Parts Serviceability. Moscow : Mashinostroenie. 1979. 176 p.
21. Suslov A. G. Manufacturing for Joint Contact Stiffness. Moscow : Nauka. 1977. 102 p.