4.1 Article

RESEARCH OF COMPUTERIZED NUMERICAL CONTROL LASER PROCESSING QUALITIES OF SOME WOOD SPECIES USED IN THE FURNITURE INDUSTRY

期刊

MADERAS-CIENCIA Y TECNOLOGIA
卷 25, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

UNIV BIO-BIO
DOI: 10.4067/s0718-221x2023000100433

关键词

CO2 laser; computerized numerical control; laser cut quality; laser cutting; woodworking

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the CNC laser cutting quality of wood species frequently used in industrial product manufacturing. The width of the upper and lower kerf, the difference between them, and the width of the heat-affected zone were evaluated. Bamboo showed the highest quality cutting values in the vertical direction of the wood materials.
In recent years, laser material processing technology has become quite widespread. The quality of laser processing of wood materials is very important in terms of not causing secondary processes in the production process. In this study, computerized numerical control laser cutting qualities of some wood species that are fre-quently used in industrial product manufacturing were investigated. In the study, 80 % irradiation and 10 mm/ sec laser cutting speed were applied to the test samples in a computerized numerical control laser machine with a 130 W carbon dioxide gas cylinder. In the case of laser cutting of 5 different wood species in the direction vertical to and parallel to the fibers, the average of the upper and lower kerf width, the difference in the width of the upper and lower kerf, the average of the width of the heat-affected zone, the width of the heat-affected zone were evaluated. In line with the findings, the effects of wood species differences on laser cutting quality in terms of material consumption, precision machining, and smoothness of cutting geometry were investigated. As a result, the highest quality cutting values were obtained from the laser cutting of the bamboo massif in terms of wood species, in the direction vertical to the fibers of the wood materials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据