复合材料与工程抛光瓷砖论文中英文资料对照外文翻译文献

外文资料翻译
题目POLISHING OF CERAMIC TILES
抛光瓷砖
专业复合材料与工程
MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING PROCESSES, 17(3), 401–413 (2002)
POLISHING OF CERAMIC TILES
C. Y. Wang,* X. Wei, and H. Yuan
Institute of Manufacturing Technology, Guangdong University ofTechnology,
Guangzhou 510090, P.R. China
ABSTRACT
Grinding and polishing are important steps in the production of decorative vitreous ceramic tiles. Different combinations of finishing wheels and polishing wheels are tested to optimize their selection. The results show that the surface glossiness depends not only on the surface quality before machining, but also on the characteristics of the ceramic tiles as well as the performance of grinding and polishing wheels. The performance of the polishing wheel is the key for a good final surface quality. The surface glossiness after finishing must be above 208 in order to get higher polishing quality because finishing will limit the maximum surface glossiness by polishing. The optimized combination of grinding and polishing wheels for all the steps will achieve shorter machining times and better surface quality. No obvious relationships are found between the hardness of ceramic tiles and surface quality or the wear of grinding wheels; therefore, the hardness of the ceramic tile cannot be used for evaluating its machinability.
Key Words: Ceramic tiles; Grinding wheel; Polishing wheel
INTRODUCTION
Ceramic tiles are the common decoration material for floors and walls of hotel, office, and family buildings. Nowadays, polished vitreous ceramic tiles are more popular as decoration material than general vitreous ceramic tiles as they can *Corresponding author. E-mail: cywang@
401
Copyright q 2002 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. have a beautiful gloss on different colors. Grinding and polishing of ceramic tiles play an important role in the surface quality, cost, and productivity of ceramic tiles manufactured for decoration. The grinding and polishing of ceramic tiles are carried out in one pass through polishing production line with many different grinding wheels or by multi passes on a polishing machine, where different grinding wheels are used.
Most factories utilize the grinding methods similar to those used for stone machining although the machining of stone is different from that of ceramic tiles. Vitreous ceramic tiles are thin, usually 5–8mm in thickness, and are a sintered material,which possess high hardness, wear resistance, and brittleness. In general, the sintering process causes surface deformation in the tiles. In themachining process, the ceramic tiles are unfixed and put on tables. These characteristics will cause easy breakage and lower surface quality if grinding wheel or grinding parameters are unsuitable. To meet the needs of ceramic tiles machining, the machinery, grinding parameters (pressure, feed speed, etc.), and grinding wheels (type and mesh size of abrasive, bond, structure of grinding wheel, etc.) must be optimized. Previous works have been reported in the field of grinding ceramic and stone[1 –4]. Only a few reports have mentioned ceramic tile machining[5 –8], where the grinding mechanism of ceramic tiles by scratching and grinding was studied. It was pointed out that the grinding mechanism of ceramic tiles is similar to that of other brittle materials. For vitreous ceramic tiles, removing the plastic deformation grooves, craters (pores), and cracks are of major concern, which depends on the micro-structure of the ceramic tile, the choice of grinding wheel and processing parameters, etc. The residual cracks generated during sintering and rough grinding processes, as well as thermal impact cracks caused by the transformation of quartz crystalline phases are the main reasons of tile breakage during processing. Surface roughness Ra and glossiness are different measurements of the surface quality. It is suggested that the surface roughness can be used to control the surface quality of rough grinding and semi-finish grinding processes, and the surface glossiness to assess the quality of finishing and polishing processes. The characteristics of the grinding wheels, abrasive mesh size for the different machining steps, machining time, pressure, feed, and removing traces of grinding wheels will affect the processing of ceramic tiles[9].
In this paper, based on the study of grinding mechanisms of ceramic tiles, the
manufacturing of grinding wheels is discussed. The actions and optimization of grinding and polishing wheels for each step are studied in particular for manualpolishing machines.
GRINDING AND POLISHING WHEELS FOR CERAMIC TILE
MACHINING
T he mac hi ni ng of cer a mi c t i l es i s a vol ume-pr oduc t i on pr oc e s s t hat uses significant numbers of grinding wheels. The grinding and polishing wheels for
ceramic tile machining are different from those for metals or structural ceramics. In this part, some results about grinding and polishing wheels are introduced for better understanding of the processing of ceramic tiles.
Grinding and Polishing Wheels
Ceramic tiles machining in a manual-polishing machine can be divided into four steps—each using different grinding wheels. Grinding wheels are marked as 2#, 3#, and 4# grinding wheels, and 0# polishing wheel; in practice, 2# and 3# grinding wheels are used for flattening uneven surfaces. Basic requirements of rough grinding wheels are long life, high removal rate, and lower price. For 2# and 3# gr inding wheel s, Si C a brasi ve s wi th me s h #180 (#320)a r e bonde d by m a g n e s i u m o x yc h l o r i d e c e m e n t(M O C)t o g e t h e r w i t h s o m e p o r o u s f i l l s, waterproof additive, etc. The MOC is used as a bond because of its low price, simple manufacturing process, and proper performance.
T he 4# grinding wheel will refine the surface to show the brightness of ceramic tile. The GC#600 abrasives and some special polishingmaterials, etc., are bonded by MOC. In order to increase the performance such as elasticity, etc., of the grinding wheel, the bakelite is always added. The 4# grinding wheels must be able to rapidly eliminate all cutting grooves and increase the surface glossiness of the ceramic tiles. The 0# polishing wheel is used for obtaining final surface glossi ness, which is made of fine Al2O3 abrasives and fill. It is bonded by unsaturated resin. The polishing wheels must be able to increase surface glossiness quickly and make the glossy ceramic tile surface permanent.
Manufacturing of Magnesium Oxychloride Cement Grinding Wheels
After the abrasives, the fills and the bond MOC are mixed and poured into the models for grinding wheels, where the chemical reaction of MOC will solidify the shape of the grinding wheels. The reaction will stop after 30 days but the hardness of grinding wheel is essentially constant after 15 days. During the initial 15-day period, the grinding wheels must be maintained at a suitable humidity and temperature.
For MOC grinding wheels, the structure of grinding wheel, the quality of abrasives, and the composition of fill will affect their grinding ability. All the factors related to the chemical reaction of MOC, such as the mole ratio of MgO/MgCl2, the specific gravity of MgCl2, the temperature and humidity to care the cement will also affect the performance of the MOC grinding wheels.
Mole Ratio of MgO/MgCl2
When MOC is used as the bond for the grinding wheels, hydration reaction takes place between active MgO and MgCl2, which generates a hard XMg e OH T2·Y e MgCl2T·ZH2O phase. Through proper control of the mole ratio of MgO/MgCl2, a reaction product with stable performance is formed. The bond is composed of 5Mg e OH T2·e MgCl2T·8H2O and 3Mg e OH T2·e MgCl2T·8H2O: As the former is more stable, optimization of the mole ratio of MgO/MgCl2 to produce more 5Mg e OH T2·e MgCl2T·8H2O is required. In general, the ideal range for the mole ratio of MgO/MgCl2 is 4–6. When the contents of the active MgO and MgCl2 are known, the quantified MgO and MgCl2 can be calculated.
Active MgO
The content of active MgO must be controlled carefully so that hydration reaction can be successfully completed with more 5Mg e OH T2·e MgCl2T·8H2O: If the content of active MgO is too high, the hydration reaction time will be too short with a large reaction heat, which increases too quickly. The concentrations of the thermal stress can cause generation of cracks in the grinding wheel. On the contrary, if the content of active MgO is too low, the reaction does not go to completion and the strength of the grinding wheel is decreased.
Fills and Additives
The fills and additives play an important role in grinding wheels. Some porous fills must be added to 2# and 3# grinding wheels in order to improve the capacity to contain the grinding chips, and hold sufficient cutting grit. Waterproof additives such as sulfates can ensure the strength of grinding wheels in processing under water condition. Some fills are very effective in increasing the surface quality of ceramic tile, but the principle is not clear.
Manufacturing of Polishing Wheels
Fine Al2O3 and some soft polishing materials, such as Fe2O3, Cr2O3, etc., are mixed together with fills. Unsaturated resin is used to bond these powders, where a chemical reaction takes place between the resin and the hardener by means of an activator. The performance of polishing wheels depends on the properties of resin and the composition of the polishing wheel. In order to contain the fine chips, which are generated by micro-cutting, some cheap soluble salt can be fed into the coolant. On the surface of the polishing wheel, the salt will leave uniform pores, which not only increase the capacity to contain chips and self-sharpening of the polishing wheel, but also improves the contact situation between polishing wheel and ceramic tiles.
Experimental Procedure
Tests were carried out in a special manual grinding machine for ceramic
tiles. Two grinding wheels were fixed in the grinding disc that was equipped to the grinding machine. The diameter of grinding disc was 255 mm. The rotating speed of the grinding disc was 580 rpm. The grinding and polishing wheels are isosceles trapezoid with surface area 31.5 cm2 (the upper edge: 2 cm, base edge: 5 cm, height: 9 cm). The pressure was adjusted by means of the load on the handle for different grinding procedures. A zigzag path was used as the moving trace for the grinding disc. To maintain flatness and edge of the ceramic tiles, at least one third of the tile must be under the grinding disc. During the grinding process, sufficient water was poured to both cool a nd wash the grinding wheels and the tiles. Four kinds of vitreous ceramic tiles were examined, as shown in Table 1.
Two different sizes of ceramic A, A400 (size: 400 ￡400 ￡5mm3T and A500
(size: 500 ￡500 ￡5mm3T were tested to understand the effect of the tile size. For ceramic tile B or C, the size was 500 ￡500 ￡5mm3: The phase composition of the
tiles was determined by x-ray diffraction technique. Surface reflection glossiness and surface roughness of the ceramic tiles and the wear of grinding wheels were measured.
The grinding and polishing wheels were made in-house. The 2# grinding
wheels with abrasives of mesh #150 and 3# grinding wheels with mesh #320 were used during rough grinding. Using the ceramic tiles with different surface toughness ground by the 2# grinding wheel for 180 sec, the action of the 3# grinding wheels were tested. The ceramic tile was marked as A500-1 (or B500-1, C500-1, A400-1) with higher initial surface toughness or A500-2 (or B500-2, C500-2, A400-2) with lower initial surface toughness.
Two kinds of finishing wheels, 4#A and 4#B were made with the same structure, abrasivity, and process, but different composition of fills and additives. Only in 4#B, a few Al2O3, barium sulfate, and magnesium stearate were added for higher surface glossiness. The composition of the polishing wheels 0#A and 0#B were different as well. In 0#B, a few white alundum (average diameter 1mm), barium sulfate, and chrome oxide were used as polishing additives, specially. After ground by 4#A (or 4#B) grinding wheel, the ceramic tiles were polished with 0#A (or 0#B). The processing combinations with 4# grinding wheels and 0#
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Effects of 2# and 3# Grinding Wheels
Surface Quality
In rough grinding with a 2# grinding wheel, the surface roughness for all the tiles asymptotically decreases as the grinding time increases, see Fig. 1. The initial asymptote point of this curve represents the optimized rough grinding time, as continued grinding essentially has no effect on the surface roughness. In these tests, the surface roughness curves decrease with grinding
time and become smooth at ,120 sec. The final surface quality for different kinds of ceramic tiles is slightly different. In terms of the initial size of the tile, the surface roughness of ceramic tile A400 e ￡400 ￡5mm3T is lower than that of A500 e500 ￡500 ￡5mm3T: The surface roughness of
c e r a m i c t i l e B500r a p i
d l y d r o p s a s t h
e g r i n d i n g t i m e i n c r e a s e s.
Thus, it is easier to remove surface material from the hardest of the
three kinds of the ceramic tiles (Table 1). However, as the final surface roughness of ceramic tile A500 is the same as that of ceramic tile C500, the hardness of theceramic tile does not have a direct relationship with the final surface quality.
In the 3# grinding wheel step, all craters and cracks on the surface of ceramic tiles caused by the 2# grinding wheel must be removed. If residual cracks and craters exist, it will be impossible to get a
high surface quality in the next step. The surface roughness obtained by the 2# grinding wheel will
also affect the surface
Figure 1. Surface roughness of several ceramic tiles as a function of grinding time for 2# grinding
wheel.
quality of next grinding step by the 3# grinding wheel. In Fig. 2, the actions of the 3# grinding wheels are given using the ceramic tiles with different initial R a, which were ground by the 2# grinding wheel for 180 sec. The curves of surface vs. grinding time rapidly decrease in 60 sec. Asymptotic behavior essentially becomes constant after 60 sec. In general, the larger the initial surface roughness, the worse the final surface roughness. For example, for ceramic tile B500-1, the initial R a was 1.53mm, the finial R a was 0.59mm after being ground by the 3# grinding wheel. When the initial R a was 2.06mm for ceramic tile B500-2, the finial R a was 0.67mm. In Ref. [8], we studied the relations between abrasive mesh size and evaluation indices of surface quality, such as surface roughness and surface glossiness. In rough grinding, the ground surface of ceramic tile shows fracture craters. These craters scatter the light, so that the surface glossiness values are almost constant at a low level. It is difficult to improve the surface glossiness after these steps. Figure 3 shows the slow increase in surface glossiness with time by means of the 3# grinding wheel. It can be seen that the glossiness of ceramic tile B500-1 is the highest. The surface glossiness of ceramic tile A400-1 is better than that of A500-1 because the effective grinding times per unit area for former is longer than for latter. These trends are similar to those for surface r o u g h n e s s i n
Fig. 2.
Wear of Grinding Wheels
The wear of grinding wheels is one of the factors controlling the machining cost. As shown in Fig.
4, the wear of grinding wheels is proportional to grinding
Figure 2. Surface roughness of several ceramic tiles as a function of grinding time for 3# grinding
wheel.
Figure 3. Surface glossiness of several ceramic tiles as a function of grinding time by 3# grinding
wheel.
time for both the grinding wheels and the three types of ceramic tiles. The wear rate of the 3# grinding wheel is larger than the 2# grinding wheel. It implies that the wear resistance of the 3# grinding wheel is not as good as 2# for constant grinding time of 180 sec. When the slope of the curve is smaller, life of the
grinding wheels will be longer. Comparison of the ceramic tiles hardness (Table 1) with the wear resistance behavior in Fig. 4 does not reveal a strong dependency. Therefore, the hardness of the ceramic tile cannot be used to distinguish the machinability. The difference of
Figure 4. Wear of grinding wheels of several ceramic tiles as a function of grinding time for 2# and
3# grinding wheels.
initial surface roughness of ceramic tile will affect the wear of grinding wheel. In Fig. 4, the wear of the 3# grinding wheel for ceramic tile B500-1 is smaller than that for ceramic tile B500-2. The initial surface roughness of the latter is higher than that of the former so that additional grinding time is required to remove the deeper residual craters on the surface. Improvement of the initial surface roughness can be the principal method for obtaining better grinding quality and grinding wheel life during rough grinding.
Effects of 4# Grinding Wheels and 0# Polishing Wheels
Surface Quality
The combination and the performance of 4# grinding and 0# polishing
wheels show different results for each ceramic tile. The grinding quality vs. grinding (polishing) time curves are presented in Fig. 5, where all the ceramic tiles were previously ground by 2# and 3# grinding wheels to the same surface quality.
The surface glossiness is used to assess surface quality because the surface roughness is nearly constant as finishing or polishing time increases[8]. In this test, the ceramic tile A400 were fast ground by 4#A and 4#B grinding wheels [Fig. 5(a)]. The surface glossiness increased rapidly during the initial 90 sec and then slowly increased. The surface glossiness by grinding wheel 4#B is higher than by 4#A. Afterwards, polishing was done by four different combinations of finishing wheel and polishing wheel. By means of polishing wheels 0#A and 0#B, we processed the surface finished by 4#A grinding wheel (described as 4#A–0#A and 4#A–0#B in Fig. 5), and the surface f i n i s h e d b y4#B g r i n d i n g w h e e l (described as 4#B–0#A and 4#B–0#B in Fig. 5). The curves of surface glossiness vs. polishing time
show parabolic behavior. After 60 sec of polishing, the surface glossiness reaches to ,508, then
slowly increases. The polishing wheel 0#B gives a better surface quality than 0#A.
In Fig. 5(a), the maximum surface glossiness of ceramic tile A400 is about ,75 by 4#B–0#B.
The relation between initial surface glossiness and the final surface quality is not strong. The effect of pre-polishing surface glossiness can be observed by 0#B polishing wheel as polishing ceramic
tile A500 [Fig. 5(b)]. The maximum surface glossiness that can be achieved is 748 in 240 sec by
4#A–0#B or 4#B–0#B. This value is lower than that of ceramic tile A400 [Fig. 5(a)].
The final surface glossiness by 4#A grinding wheel is highly different from that by 4#B grinding wheel for ceramic tile B500, as shown in Fig. 5(c), but the final polishing roughness is the same when 0#A polishing wheel is used. The better performance of 0#B polishing wheel is shown because the surface glossiness can
increase from 17 to 228 in 30 sec. The maximum surface glossiness is 658 by 4#B–0#B. The
curves of polishing time vs. surface glossiness in Fig. 5(d) present the same results as polishing of ceramic tile B500 [Fig. 5(c)]. With 0#A polishing
Figure 5. Surface glossiness for ceramic tiles (a) A400, (b) A500, (c) B500, and (d) C500 as a
function of grinding (polishing) time for 4# grinding wheels and 0# polishing wheels.
wheel, the action of pre-polishing surface glossiness is significant. The best value of surface glossiness in 240 sec is 708 by 4#B–0#B as polishing ceramic tile C500. The results discussed
earlier describe that the surface glossiness by 0# polishing wheel will depend not only on the pre-polishing surface glossiness formed by 4# grinding wheel, but also on the characteristics of the ceramic tiles and the performance of 0# polishing wheel. The differences of initial surface glossiness and final surface glossiness are larger for 4#A and 4#B. If the prepolishing surface roughness is lower, the final surface glossiness will be higher.
Figure 5. Continued.
The polishing time taken to achieve the maximum surface glossiness will be also shorter. The initial surface quality will limit the maximum value of polishing surface glossiness that can be
obtained. To reach a final surface glossiness of above 608, the minimum pre-polishing surface glossiness must be above 208.
The performance of the polishing wheel is the key to good surface quality. The polishing ability of the polishing wheels depends on the properties of the ceramic tiles as well. Even if the same grinding and polishing wheels are used, on all four ceramic tiles, the maximum surface glossiness values of ceramic tiles are different. The ceramic tile A500 shows the best surface glossiness, and ceramic
tile B500 shows the worst, although it is easier to roughly grind ceramic tile B500. The peak value of the surface glossiness is also limited by the properties of
ceramic tiles.
Wear of Grinding and Polishing Wheels
The life of 4# grinding wheels and 0# polishing wheels (Fig. 6) are longer than those of the rough grinding wheels (Fig. 4). For finer grinding (Fig. 6), it is impossible to distinguish the relation between grinding wheels and ceramic tiles. Polishing wheels have longer life because they produce more plastic deformation than removal.
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
(1) The performance of grinding and polishing wheels will affect its life and the surface quality of ceramic tiles.
(2) In ceramic tile machining, the surface quality gained in the previous step will limit the final surface quality in the next step. The surface glossiness of pre-polishing must be higher than 208 in
order to get the highest polishing quality. The optimization of the combination of grinding wheels and polishing wheels for all the steps will shorten machining time and improve surface quality. Optimization must be determined for each ceramics tiles.
Figure 6. Wear of grinding wheels 4# and polishing wheels 0# for several ceramic tiles as a
function of grinding time.
(3) The effect of hardness of ceramic tiles is not direct, thus the hardness of ceramic tiles cannot be used for evaluating the machinability of
ceramic tiles.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank Nature Science Foundation of Guangdong Province and Science
Foundation of Guangdong High Education for their financial support.
REFERENCES
1. Wang, C.Y.; Liu, P.D.; Chen, P.Y. Grinding Mechanism of Marble. Abrasives
Grinding 1987, 2 (38), 6–10, (in Chinese).
2. Inasaki, I. Grinding of Hard and Brittle Materials. Annals of the CIRP 1987, 36 (2),
463–471.
3. Zhang, B.; Howes, D. Material Removal Mechanisms in Grinding Ceramics. Annals
of the CIRP 1994, 45 (1), 263–266.
4. Malkin, S.; Hwang, T.W. Grinding Mechanism for Ceramics. Annals of the CIRP
1996, 46 (2), 569–580.
5. Black, I. Laser Cutting Decorative Glass, Ceramic Tile. Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 1998,
77 (9), 53–57.
6. Black, I.; Livingstone, S.A.J.; Chua, K.L. A Laser Beam Machining (LBM) Database for the Cutting of Ceramic Tile. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1998, 84 (1–3), 47–55.
7. Jiang, D.F. Mirror Surface Polishing of Ceramic Tile. New Building Mater. 1994, 20
(11), 27–30, (in Chinese).
8. Ma, J.F. Analysis on Man-Made Floor Brick and Manufacture of Grinding Segment
Used for Floor Brick. Diamond Abrasive Eng. 1996, 6 (95), 35–46, (in Chinese). 9. Wang, C.Y.; Wei, X.; Yuan, H. Grinding Mechanism of Vitreous Ceramic Tile. Chin.
J. Mech. Eng. 1998, 9 (8), 9–11, 46 (in Chinese).
材料与制造工艺17(3), 401–413 (2002)
抛光瓷砖
王CY,* 魏X, 袁H
制造技术研究所，广东工业大学
科技，广州510090，中国P.R.
摘要研磨和抛光，是装饰玻璃陶瓷砖的生产中的重要步骤。

对于磨砂轮和抛光轮的不同组合进行测试，以优化他们的选择。

结果表明，瓷砖的表面光泽，不仅取决于之间加工的质量，也取决于瓷砖的特点以及研磨和抛光轮抛光时的表现。

抛光轮的表现是是否能获得良好抛光砖的关键。

精加工后的表面光泽度必须高于208，以获得更高的抛光质量，因为精加工将限制最大的表面光泽度抛光。

抛光车轮的研磨和所有抛光步骤的优化组合，将会实现更短的加工时间和更好的表面质量。

由于陶瓷砖的硬度和表面质量或砂轮的磨损之间并没有发现明显的表面关系存在，因此，瓷砖的硬度不能被用来评估其可加工。

关键词瓷砖，砂轮抛光轮
引言
瓷砖是常见的酒店、写字楼及家庭的建筑物的地板和墙壁的装饰材料,。

如今,抛光砖是一个比一般玻璃陶瓷砖更受欢迎的装饰材料,因为他们可以拥有一个漂亮的表面光泽，而且还有各种颜色用来挑选。

再生产装饰用瓷砖中，瓷砖表面质量、瓷砖成本、以及设备生产力对于瓷砖的磨削和抛光中起非常重要的作用。

抛光砖的研磨和抛光是需要进行建设一个抛光生产线，该抛光生产线需要一个抛光机上有许多不同的砂轮或着由多个使用不同样式的砂轮的抛光机进行流水式传递抛光。

大部分的工厂利用研磨方法进行抛光加工，类似于那些用于石材加工的技术方法。

虽然石材加工不同于瓷砖加工。

薄玻璃陶瓷墙地砖,通常厚度为5-8mm,由于是烧结材料,具有高硬度、耐磨性、脆性。

一般来说,烧结过程中会导致瓷砖的表面变形。

在加工过程中,瓷砖是不固定的。

这些特性会导致瓷砖容易破碎,如果砂轮材料质量底下，会降低磨削参数或者直接不合适参与抛光加工。

应此陶瓷砖的加工,机械、磨削参数(压力、加工速度等),砂轮(类型和体型大小、结构、磨料砂轮等),必须优化。

据报道，在以前的作品已经涉及研磨陶瓷和石材[1 - 4]领域。

只有少数报告提到的瓷砖加工[5 - 8]，对其中的瓷砖刮擦和研磨瓷砖的机理进行了研究。

有人指出，抛光瓷砖的机理是类似于研磨其他的脆性材料。

玻璃瓷砖，消除塑性变形沟槽和表面细小坑洞（孔）和裂缝是密切相关的，这取决于瓷砖的材质，研磨轮和工艺参数的选择等决定的。

微观结构所产生的残余裂缝在烧结过程中，粗磨过程，以及热冲击裂纹引起的石英结晶相的转变，是加工过程中的瓷砖破损的主要原因。

对于表面粗糙度和光泽度的是不同的的材质表面质量测量。

有人建议，表面粗糙度可用于粗磨和半精磨过程控制的表面质量的参考，表面光泽度则可以评估精加工和抛光过程的质量。

不同的砂轮，磨料的加工步骤，砂轮尺寸，加工时间，压力，添加剂，砂轮消除痕迹的方式，将会影响加工的瓷砖[9]。

在这个文章中，对于在此基础上的磨瓷砖机制的研究，制造砂轮进行了讨论。

特别是手动抛光机研磨和抛光车轮每一步的行动和优化研究。

研磨和抛光轮的瓷砖加工
抛光砖的加工是一种大型的流水线生产，在这种生产过程中，抛光轮的使用时非
常重要的一个步骤。

研磨与抛光轮
手动抛光机的瓷砖加工可分为四个步骤，每个步骤使用不同的砂轮。

其中被标记为2＃，3＃，4＃的磨砂轮，标记为0＃抛光砂轮;。

在实践中，2＃和3＃砂轮为压扁材质表面凹凸不平的颗粒。

粗砂轮的基本要求是长寿命，高去除率和较低的价格。

2＃和3＃砂轮，碳化硅磨料磨具网＃180（＃320）氯氧镁水泥（MOC）与一些多孔填充物，防水添加剂等共同建造成的。

由于其低使用价格低，制造工艺简单，适宜的性能，普遍适用于生产中。

4＃砂轮用于完善的瓷砖的表面的亮度。

由GC＃600磨料和一些特殊的抛光材料等组成，是由MOC粘合。

为了提高性能，如增加砂轮的弹性力学，总是在其中参加酚醛树脂。

4＃砂轮必须能够迅速地消除所有有切割产生的凹槽，增加瓷砖的表面光泽。

0＃抛光轮用于提高最后的表面光泽度，它是由超细Al2O3作为研磨剂并填充进去。

它是由不饱和树脂粘结。

抛光轮必须能够快速地提高瓷砖的表面光泽度，使瓷砖表面永久有光泽。

氯氧镁水泥砂轮制造
模具研磨之后，填充和混合粘合MOC的砂轮，其中的化学反应，MOC将巩固砂轮的形状，倒入模型。

反应之后30天后将停止反映，经过15天的反应，15天后砂轮的硬度基本恒定。

在最初的15天期间，砂轮必须保持在一个合适的温度和湿度
砂轮的组成结构，砂轮磨料的组成和品质，和组成M OC砂轮的填充物，会影响他们的磨削能力。

MOC有关化学反应的所有因素，如摩尔比的MgO/MgCl2，氯化镁的比重，关心水泥的温度和湿度也将影响到MOC的砂轮性能
MgO/MgCl2的摩尔比
MOC用的砂轮粘结时，参加水化反应的活性氧化镁和氯化镁，从而产生坚硬XMgðOHÞ2·YðMgCl2Þ·ZH2O相位的发生。

通过对MgO/MgCl2的摩尔比的适当控制，最终使具有稳定的性能的反应产物形成。

粘合组成5MgðOHÞ2·ðMgCl2Þ·8H2O 和3MgðOHÞ2·ðMgCl2Þ·8H2O：前者是更稳定，可以优化摩尔比的MgO/MgCl2产生更多的5MgðOHÞ2·ðMgCl2Þ·8H2O以满足需要。

在一般情况下，摩尔比的MgO/MgCl2的理想范围是4-6。

当活性氧化镁的含量和氯化镁是众所周知的，氯化镁和氯化镁的计量是可以计算出来
活跃氧化镁
活性氧化镁的含量必须严格加以控制，使水化反应能够可以顺利完成，从而产生更多的5MgðOHÞ2·ðMgCl2Þ·8H2O：如果活性氧化镁的含量过高，水化反应将是一个迅速的放热反应，反应产生的热量太快，反应时间太短，热量增加得太快。

则反应产生的热应力的高浓度能够使砂轮产生裂痕。

相反，如果活性氧化镁的含量过低，则反应则不会产生预期强度的砂轮，是砂轮强度下降。

结果与讨论
2＃和3＃砂轮的影响
表面品质
对于进行粗磨削的#2磨砂轮，实验所有瓷砖表面粗糙度随着磨削时间的增加而减小，见图 1。

这条曲线表明，在#2粗磨削的磨削时间接近磨削时间渐进线后，瓷砖的表面光泽度因磨削而产生的变化越来越小，直到不产生变化。

在这些测试中，瓷砖的表面粗糙度曲线随研磨时间逐渐减小。

120秒后，不同的瓷砖表面光泽度略有不同。

在瓷砖的初始大小，A400的D400瓷砖表面粗糙度
400£5mm3Þ低于A500 D500£500£mm3Þ：瓷砖B500型号的表面粗糙度研磨时间的增加迅速下降。

因此，表一显示了从最容易磨削到最难磨削的三种材料表面质量。

然而，瓷砖的硬度与最终的表面质量没有直接的关系。

图1。

#2磨削轮对瓷砖抛光的表面磨光度与磨削时间的函数关系图
在3＃磨削轮的步骤中，瓷砖上的所有细小坑洞和由2＃磨轮造成瓷砖表面上的裂缝，必须清除。

如果这一步不能将其全部清除，下一步将不会得到较高的抛光度。

2＃磨轮加工获得的表面粗糙度也会影响#3磨光轮的加工。

图。

2，3＃砂轮的行动给予不同的显色系数磨削180秒，其中2＃磨轮用瓷砖。

表面与研磨时间的曲线迅速减少于60 s，之后瓷砖的抛光度基本上变成常数，60秒后。

在一般情况下，初始表面粗糙度越大，最终表面粗糙度越差例如，瓷砖B500-1，最初的显色系数1.53毫米，磨削后后，由3＃磨轮地面0.59毫米的。

当最初的显色系数2.06毫米瓷砖B500-2，顶尖是0.67毫米。

在图8中，我们研究了磨具大小和啮合的表面质量评价指标，如表面粗糙度和表面光泽度之间的关系。

在粗研磨中，瓷砖表面有着细小的坑洞。

这些细小的坑洞会散射光，使表面光泽度值几乎恒定在一个较低的水平。

这些步骤后很难提高瓷砖的表面光泽。

图3显示了通过3＃磨轮研磨瓷砖后表面光泽度随时间的增
长缓慢。

可以看出，瓷砖B500-1的光泽度度是最高的。

A400-1瓷砖表面光泽度优于A500-1，因为每单位面积的有效研磨率为前比后者长。

在图二中，这些研磨粗糙度的趋势是相似的。

砂轮的磨损
图2。

几个瓷砖在#3磨轮磨削后表面粗糙度与磨削时间的函数关系。

图3。

几个瓷砖在#3磨轮磨削后表面光泽度与研磨时间的函数关系
砂轮的磨损是加工成本控制的主要元素之一。

正如图4所示。

砂轮磨损，磨削砂轮和三种类型的瓷砖时间是成正比的。

3＃磨轮的磨损率是大于2＃磨轮。

这意味着，在180秒内不断使用#2#3两种砂轮进行磨削，斜率小的那一组使用寿命更加长。

图4。

#2#3两个砂轮磨削几个瓷砖时砂轮磨损度与研磨时间的函数关系。

如表一，瓷砖的硬度并没有显示瓷砖的耐磨性。

图4并没有显示瓷砖的耐磨性与瓷砖的硬度之间的关系。

因此，瓷砖的硬度不能被用来区分瓷砖的可加工性。

瓷砖的初始表面粗糙度的差异会影响砂轮的磨损。

图4，瓷砖B500-13＃磨轮磨损比瓷砖B500-2小。

后者的初始表面粗糙度是高于前者的，额外的研磨时间，使需要去除表面上的更深的残留细小坑洞。

初始表面粗糙度的改善是为取得更好的磨削质量和延长磨轮的使用寿命的一个很好的办法。

4＃砂轮和0＃抛光轮的影响
表面品质
#0#4这两种磨轮组合对不同的瓷砖进行磨削，其结果显示了瓷砖的不同性能。

图5为磨削质量与磨削（抛光）时间曲线，所有的瓷砖上一步由2＃，3＃砂轮研磨出相同的表面品质。

表面的光泽度是用来评估表面质量，表面粗糙度，因为整理或抛光的时间的增加是恒定的[8]。

在这个测试中，在最初的90秒内，瓷砖A400的表面质量在4＃和4＃B的砂轮家攻下快速增加[图 5（一）]。

表面光泽度迅速增加，然后慢慢增加。

表面光泽度磨轮4＃B是高于4＃A.之后，由四个不同的组合，完成轮和抛光轮进行抛光。

通过抛光轮0＃0＃B的，我们处理的表面完成4＃磨轮（4形容为＃0＃和4＃，0＃B在图5），和表面完成4＃B的磨轮（4＃的B-0＃和4＃0＃的B-B在图5中所述）。

表面光泽与抛光时间的曲线显示出抛物线的行为。

60秒抛光后，表面光泽度达到508，然后慢慢增加。

抛光轮0＃给出了更好的表面质量超过0＃A.。