Parameter Optimization of Laser Polishing Based on Orthogonal Experiment and Response Surface Method

Xudong Huang; Tao Wang; Shaowu Hu; Tao Yao; Runpeng Miao; Qingchuan Kang; Yizhi Zhang

doi:10.3788/LOP202259.1114004

Journals >Laser & Optoelectronics Progress >Volume 59 >Issue 11 >Page 1114004 > Article

Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
Vol. 59, Issue 11, 1114004 (2022)

Parameter Optimization of Laser Polishing Based on Orthogonal Experiment and Response Surface Method

Xudong Huang, Tao Wang^*, Shaowu Hu, Tao Yao, Runpeng Miao, Qingchuan Kang, and Yizhi Zhang

Author Affiliations

College of Mechanical Engineering, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjing300401, China

show less

DOI: 10.3788/LOP202259.1114004 Cite this Article Set citation alerts

Xudong Huang, Tao Wang, Shaowu Hu, Tao Yao, Runpeng Miao, Qingchuan Kang, Yizhi Zhang. Parameter Optimization of Laser Polishing Based on Orthogonal Experiment and Response Surface Method[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(11): 1114004 Copy Citation Text

show less

Fig. 1. Schematic of laser polishing equipment

Download full size

Fig. 2. TC4 alloy after laser polishing. (a) Substrate surface and polished field; (b) surface after laser polishing

Download full size

Fig. 3. Schematic of laser polishing. (a) Trajectory of laser polishing; (b) mechanism diagram of laser polishing

Download full size

Fig. 4. Schematic of factors influencing laser polishing

Download full size

Fig. 5. Surface microscopic morphologies. (a) Original surface; (b) No. 7 -1 sample; (c) No. 9-1 sample; (d) No. 3-1 sample

Download full size

Fig. 6. Roughness changes before and after laser polishing

Download full size

Fig. 7. Range effect diagrams.(a) Range variation diagram of defocusing distance; (b) range variation diagram of laser power; (c) range variation diagram of repetition frequency; (d) range variation diagram of scanning speed

Download full size

Fig. 8. 3D surface topographies of laser polishing. (a) Original surface; (b) surface after polishing with optimal parameters; (c) XY surface without polishing; (d) XY surface after polishing with optimal parameters

Download full size

Fig. 9. Surface microscopic morphologies. (a) No. 20 sample; (b) No. 9 sample

Download full size

Fig. 10. Comparison between actual and predicted values

Download full size

Fig. 11. Effects of significant interaction terms on surface roughness. (a) Effects of laser power and repetition frequency; (b) effects of laser power and scanning speed; (c) effects of repetition frequency and scanning speed

Download full size

Composition	Al	V	Fe	C	O	N	H	Ti
Mass fraction /%	5.50‒6.50	3.50‒4.50	0‒0.25	0‒0.08	0‒0.13	0‒0.13	0‒0.12	Bal.

Table 1. Main chemical compositions of TC4 titanium alloy

Variable	Low	Medium	High
Defocusing distance /mm	3	4	5
Laser power /W	20	25	30
Laser repetition frequency /kHz	70	90	110
Laser scanning speed /（mm $∙ s^{- 1}$ ）	1650	1700	1750

Table 2. Level table of orthogonal experimental factors

Sample No.	h /mm	P /W	f /kHz	v /（mm $∙ s^{- 1}$ ）	Roughness /μm		Average roughness /μm
Sample No.	h /mm	P /W	f /kHz	v /（mm $∙ s^{- 1}$ ）	First	Second	Average roughness /μm
1-1	3	20	70	1650	0.1868	0.1774	0.1821
2-1	3	25	90	1700	0.1526	0.1640	0.1583
3-1	3	30	110	1750	0.1148	0.1369	0.1259
4-1	4	20	90	1750	0.2291	0.2187	0.2239
5-1	4	25	110	1650	0.2329	0.2481	0.2405
6-1	4	30	70	1700	0.1931	0.1783	0.1857
7-1	5	20	110	1700	0.2775	0.2893	0.2834
8-1	5	25	70	1750	0.1988	0.2376	0.2182
9-1	5	30	90	1650	0.2022	0.1952	0.1987

Table 3. Design matrix of orthogonal experiment and results

Parameter	h /mm	P /W	f /kHz	v /（mm⋅ $s^{- 1}$ ）
$K_{1}$	0.1554	0.2298	0.1953	0.2071
$K_{2}$	0.2167	0.2057	0.1936	0.2091
$K_{3}$	0.2334	0.1701	0.2166	0.1893
R	0.078	0.0597	0.023	0.0198

Table 4. Range analysis results

Sample No.	h /mm	P /W	f /kHz	$v$ /（mm $∙ s^{- 1}$ ）	$R_{a}$ /μm
1	5	25	90	1750	0.2340
2	4	25	90	1700	0.1842
3	4	25	90	1700	0.1968
4	4	20	90	1650	0.1790
5	5	25	90	1650	0.2301
6	5	25	110	1700	0.2565
7	4	20	110	1700	0.2611
8	5	30	90	1700	0.2098
9	3	30	90	1700	0.1115
10	4	25	70	1650	0.1688
11	4	20	90	1750	0.2340
12	4	30	90	1750	0.1546
13	3	25	110	1700	0.1799
14	4	25	110	1650	0.2440
15	4	30	70	1700	0.1818
16	4	30	110	1700	0.1878
17	4	30	90	1650	0.1784
18	3	25	90	1750	0.1756
19	4	20	70	1700	0.2012
20	5	20	90	1700	0.2732
21	3	25	70	1700	0.1381
22	4	25	90	1700	0.1932
23	4	25	90	1700	0.2009
24	4	25	70	1750	0.1982
25	5	25	70	1700	0.2298
26	4	25	110	1750	0.2189
27	3	25	90	1650	0.1422
28	3	20	90	1700	0.1820
29	4	25	90	1700	0.1955

Table 5. BBD experimental parameters and results

Source	Sum of squares	Mean square	$F_{v a l u e}$	$P_{v a l u e}$	Reliability
R²=0.9576	$R_{A D J}^{2}$ =0.9406	$R_{P R E D}^{2}$ =0.9002
Model	0.038	0.004758	56.4	< 0.0001	Significant
A	0.021	0.021	251.14	< 0.0001
B	0.007831	0.007831	92.83	< 0.0001
C	0.004419	0.004419	52.39	< 0.0001
D	0.00044	0.00044	5.22	0.0335
BC	0.000725	0.000725	8.59	0.0083
BD	0.001551	0.001551	18.38	0.0004
CD	0.0007437	0.0007437	8.82	0.0076
C²	0.001167	0.001167	13.83	0.0014
Residual	0.001687	0.00008436
Lack of fit value	0.001532	0.00009578	2.48	0.1969	Not significant
Pure error	0.0001547	0.00003868
Total	0.04

Table 6. Variance analysis of surface roughness model

Download Citation

Set citation alerts for the article

Tools

Set citation alerts for the article

Save the article for my favorites

Paper Information