Abstract Electrophoresis-assisted micro-ultrasonic machining (EPAMUSM) is an effective method for solving the problem of using traditional micro-ultrasonic machining (MUSM) to fabricate micro-holes in materials that are hard and brittle, namely the low utilization ratio of abrasive particles. EPAMUSM uses an electric field to attract the abrasive particles to the processing area during processing, which is useful for improving both the utilization ratio of abrasive particles and the processing quality. Numerical simulations of the concentration distributions of abrasive particles in MUSM and EPAMUSM show that the abrasive concentration on the tool surface is much higher in EPAMUSM. The concentration increases rapidly from 1 mol/m3 to 4.68 mol/m3 after 10 s in EPAMUSM. Comparative experiments show that EPAMUSM has advantages over MUSM under the same processing conditions: the EPAMUSM edge chipping rate (0.03) is much less than the MUSM one (0.22) and the EPAMUSM material removal rate (1.916 × 10−4 mm3/min) is marginally better than the MUSM one (1.718 × 10−4 mm3/min). Single-factor experiments are used to study how varying certain parameters (namely DC voltage, ultrasonic power, and spindle speed) affects EPAMUSM manufacturing quality and efficiency. Finally, the processing parameters are optimized by means of response-surface experiments, and the optimum EPAMUSM processing parameters are determined (namely an applied voltage of 7.5 V, an ultrasonic power of 22.5 W, a spindle speed of 300 rpm, and a mass fraction of 10%).

中文翻译：

---

电泳辅助微超声加工微孔加工实验与模拟

摘要 电泳辅助微超声加工(EPAMUSM)是解决传统微超声加工(MUSM)在硬脆材料上加工微孔即磨料颗粒利用率低的有效方法。 . EPAMUSM在加工过程中利用电场将磨粒吸引到加工区域，有利于提高磨粒的利用率和加工质量。MUSM 和 EPAMUSM 中磨粒浓度分布的数值模拟表明，EPAMUSM 中刀具表面的磨粒浓度要高得多。在 EPAMUSM 中 10 秒后，浓度从 1 mol/m3 迅速增加到 4.68 mol/m3。对比实验表明，在相同的加工条件下，EPAMUSM 比 MUSM 具有优势：EPAMUSM 边缘切削率 (0.03) 远小于 MUSM one (0.22)，EPAMUSM 材料去除率 (1.916 × 10−4 mm3/min) 为略好于 MUSM (1.718 × 10−4 mm3/min)。单因素实验用于研究改变某些参数（即直流电压、超声波功率和主轴速度）如何影响 EPAMUSM 制造质量和效率。最后通过响应面实验对加工参数进行优化，确定最佳EPAMUSM加工参数（即施加电压7.5 V，超声功率22.5 W，主轴转速300 rpm，质量分数10%）。03) 远小于 MUSM one (0.22)，EPAMUSM 材料去除率 (1.916 × 10−4 mm3/min) 略好于 MUSM one (1.718 × 10−4 mm3/min)。单因素实验用于研究改变某些参数（即直流电压、超声波功率和主轴速度）如何影响 EPAMUSM 制造质量和效率。最后通过响应面实验对加工参数进行优化，确定最佳EPAMUSM加工参数（即施加电压7.5 V，超声功率22.5 W，主轴转速300 rpm，质量分数10%）。03) 远小于 MUSM one (0.22)，EPAMUSM 材料去除率 (1.916 × 10−4 mm3/min) 略好于 MUSM one (1.718 × 10−4 mm3/min)。单因素实验用于研究改变某些参数（即直流电压、超声波功率和主轴速度）如何影响 EPAMUSM 制造质量和效率。最后通过响应面实验对加工参数进行优化，确定最佳EPAMUSM加工参数（即施加电压7.5 V，超声功率22.5 W，主轴转速300 rpm，质量分数10%）。超声波功率和主轴速度）影响 EPAMUSM 的制造质量和效率。最后通过响应面实验对加工参数进行优化，确定最佳EPAMUSM加工参数（即施加电压7.5 V，超声功率22.5 W，主轴转速300 rpm，质量分数10%）。超声波功率和主轴速度）影响 EPAMUSM 制造质量和效率。最后通过响应面实验对加工参数进行优化，确定最佳EPAMUSM加工参数（即施加电压7.5 V，超声功率22.5 W，主轴转速300 rpm，质量分数10%）。