Prediction of Residual Stress in Boring Main Bearing Holes of Marine Diesel Engine Bodies

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-132X.2025.08.023

Abstract

Abstract:

As a critical structural element of the engine body， the main bearing hole directly affected the engine's overall performances and long-term reliability. For predicting residual stress， methods combining finite element simulation， response surface modelling， and machining experiments were utilized to explore how machining parameters affected surface residual stress， culminating in the determination of cutting parameters focused on minimizing these stresses. The results show that the established three-dimensional simulation model for machining surface residual stress in the main bearing hole correlates well with actual surface residual stress and the predictions of the response surface model. The response surface model achieves higher prediction accuracy than the finite element model， improving the average prediction error from 15.6% to 2.5%. Optimal cutting parameters may reduce machining-induced residual stress significantly， decreasing surface residual stress by 50.6%， cutting residual stress by 53.6%， and feed-induced residual stress by 46.2%.

Key words: marine diesel engine body, boring, residual stress, finite element simulation

摘要：

船用柴油机主轴承孔作为船用柴油机机体的关键结构之一，其加工质量直接影响着船用柴油机的整体性能及长期的运行可靠性。为实现对残余应力的预测，采用有限元仿真、响应面模型与加工实验相结合的方法研究了加工参数对表面残余应力的影响规律，确定了以残余应力最小化为目标的切削参数。结果表明：所建的主轴承孔三维镗削加工表面残余应力仿真模型的计算结果和响应面模型预测结果与实际表面残余应力相一致；响应面模型预测精度高于有限元模型，平均预测误差从15.6%减小至2.5%；通过确定切削参数可以有效减小零件的加工残余应力，表面残余应力减小50.6%，切削残余应力减小53.6%，进给残余应力减小46.2%。

关键词: 船用柴油机机体, 镗削加工, 残余应力, 有限元仿真

CLC Number:

TH142

Jiyuan HAN, Jiahao ZHANG, Yong ZHAN, Hongyi ZHANG, Dongyue QU. Prediction of Residual Stress in Boring Main Bearing Holes of Marine Diesel Engine Bodies[J]. China Mechanical Engineering, 2025, 36(8): 1883-1892.

韩济远, 张嘉豪, 展勇, 张鸿羿, 曲东越. 船用柴油机机体主轴承孔镗削加工残余应力预测[J]. 中国机械工程, 2025, 36(8): 1883-1892.

Figures/Tables 25

Fig.1 Main bearing holes of marine diesel engine bodies

Tab.1 Parameters of J-C constitutive model for Q235

A/MPa	B/MPa	n	C	m	T_m/℃	T_r/℃	$ε ¯ ˙ 0$
293.8	230.2	0.578	0.0652	0.706	1522	20	0.0021

Tab.1 Parameters of J-C constitutive model for Q235

A/MPa	B/MPa	n	C	m	T_m/℃	T_r/℃	$ε ¯ ˙ 0$
293.8	230.2	0.578	0.0652	0.706	1522	20	0.0021

Fig.2 Diagram of boring parameters in the simulation model

Fig.3 Schematic diagram of finite element model establishment

Fig.4 Flowchart for extracting machining residual stresses along the depth direction

Tab.2 Simulated values of residual stress in orthogonal experimental groups

实验编号	切削速度/ （m·min^-1）	切削深度/ mm	进给量/ （mm·r^-1）	仿真表面残余应力/MPa
1	75.398	0.1	0.05	191.640
2	94.248	0.2	0.05	238.855
3	117.809	0.3	0.05	306.562
4	94.248	0.1	0.10	256.518
5	117.809	0.2	0.10	310.733
6	75.398	0.3	0.10	202.779
7	117.809	0.1	0.15	330.839
8	75.398	0.2	0.15	207.642
9	94.248	0.3	0.15	326.356

Tab.3 The chemical composition of Q235 steel （mass fraction）

w（C）	w（Si）	w（Mn）	w（P）	w（S）
0.13	0.32	1.43	0.028	0.022
w（Fe）	w（Nb）	w（Alt）	w（V）	w（Cev）
97.687	0.003	0.004	0.006	0.37

Tab.4 The physical properties of Q235 steel

密度/

（g·cm^-3）

Fig.5 Boring machining sample

Tab.5 The geometric parameters of the cutting tool

前角γ₀/（°）

后角α₀/ （°）

主偏角κ_r/（°）

刀尖圆弧

半径r_ε /mm

切削刃钝圆

半径r_e /μm

0.4

Tab.6 Cutting parameters at specific levels and values

切削参数	试验水平
切削参数	1	2	3
切削速度v/（m·min^-1）	75.398	94.248	117.809
切削深度a_p/mm	0.1	0.2	0.3
切削进给量f/（mm·r^-1）	0.05	0.10	0.15

Fig.6 Experiment of residual stress measurement based on the blind hole method

Tab.7 Measurement results of the response surface experiment for surface residual stress

编号	切削速度v/ （m·min^-1）	切削深度a_p/ mm	进给量f/ （mm·r^-1）	X向残余应力/ MPa	Y向残余应力/ MPa	表层残余应力/ MPa
1	75.398	0.3	0.05	171.114	99.8287	198.106
2	94.248	0.2	0.05	160.871	124.017	203.125
3	117.809	0.3	0.05	221.097	122.587	267.881
4	94.248	0.2	0.15	238.106	143.869	263.785
5	75.398	0.1	0.15	177.757	122.787	216.042
6	117.809	0.3	0.15	270.404	204.146	338.813
7	75.398	0.2	0.10	168.366	130.232	212.855
…	…	…	…	…	…	…
…	…	…	…	…	…	…
20	94.248	0.1	0.10	195.016	101.220	219.719
21	94.248	0.3	0.05	204.505	94.688	225.362
22	94.248	0.1	0.15	229.226	104.637	251.979
23	94.248	0.3	0.15	206.740	191.327	281.687

Fig.7 Comparison of predicted and experimental values of surface residual stress

Tab.8 Range analysis of residual stress in machining

切削参数		切削速度v/ （m·min^-1）	切削深度 a_p/mm	进给量f/ （mm·r^-1）
$σ x$ /MPa	K_avg1	167.458	178.781	169.151
	K_avg2	187.542	200.046	204.363
	K_avg3	225.721	201.895	207.207
	R₁	58.263	23.114	38.056
$σ y$ /MPa	K_avg4	137.822	130.628	118.797
	K_avg5	138.855	133.291	131.900
	K_avg6	145.598	158.355	171.577
	R₂	7.776	27.727	52.779
$σ s$ /MPa	K_avg7	217.431	222.938	212.831
	K_avg8	234.844	240.893	244.821
	K_avg9	274.745	263.189	269.368
	R₃	57.314	40.251	56.537

Tab.8 Range analysis of residual stress in machining

切削参数		切削速度v/ （m·min^-1）	切削深度 a_p/mm	进给量f/ （mm·r^-1）
$σ x$ /MPa	K_avg1	167.458	178.781	169.151
	K_avg2	187.542	200.046	204.363
	K_avg3	225.721	201.895	207.207
	R₁	58.263	23.114	38.056
$σ y$ /MPa	K_avg4	137.822	130.628	118.797
	K_avg5	138.855	133.291	131.900
	K_avg6	145.598	158.355	171.577
	R₂	7.776	27.727	52.779
$σ s$ /MPa	K_avg7	217.431	222.938	212.831
	K_avg8	234.844	240.893	244.821
	K_avg9	274.745	263.189	269.368
	R₃	57.314	40.251	56.537

Fig.8 Main effect chart of cutting parameters

Fig.9 Range analysis plot of cutting parameters

Tab.9 Significance test of response surface model

	平方和	均方差	F值	P值	显著性
模型	25 409.55	2823.28	692.59	<0.0001	显著
A	11 022.27	11 022.27	2703.90	<0.0001	显著
B	4567.87	4567.87	1120.56	<0.0001	显著
C	9013.77	9013.77	2211.19	<0.0001	显著
AB	21.72	21.72	5.33	0.0436	显著
AC	2.10	2.10	0.5155	0.4892	—
BC	205.82	205.82	50.49	<0.0001	显著
A²	80.28	80.28	19.69	0.0013	显著
B²	36.07	36.07	8.85	0.0139	显著
C²	4.26	4.26	1.05	0.3306	—
残差	40.76	4.08	—	—	—
失拟项	30.15	6.03	2.84	0.1384	不显著
纯误差	10.62	2.12	—	—	—
总离差	25450.31	—	—	—	—

Tab.10 Experimental and predicted values of the surface residual stress prediction model

实验编号	切削速度v/（m·min^-1）	切削深度a_p/mm	进给量f/（mm·r^-1）	实验表面残余应力/MPa	预测表面残余应力/MPa
1	94.248	0.3	0.05	225.362	223.071
2	94.248	0.1	0.15	251.979	240.628
3	94.248	0.3	0.15	281.687	293.166
4	75.398	0.1	0.05	167.487	168.640
5	75.398	0.2	0.15	244.808	238.719

Fig.10 Comparison of predicted and experimental result for surface residual stress

Fig.11 Response surface and contour map of cutting speed and cutting depth on boring surface residual stresses

Fig.12 Response surface and contour map of cutting speed and feed rate on boring surface residual stresses

Fig.13 Response surface and contour map of cutting depth and feed rate on boring surface residual stresses

Fig.14 Comparison of residual stress results from different cutting groups

Tab.11 Processing surface quality under different cutting parameters

	粗糙度 Ra/mm	表面残余应力σ_s/MPa	切削残余应力σ_x /MPa	进给残余应力σ_y /MPa
第1组	1.823	338.813	270.404	204.146
第2组	0.201	167.487	125.485	109.788
变化量	-1.622	-171.326	-144.919	-94.358
降幅/%	88.9	50.6	53.6	46.2

References 20

[1]	WITHERS P J. Residual Stress and Its Role in Failure［J］. Reports on Progress in Physics， 2007， 70（12）： 2211.
[2]	AKHTAR W， LAZOGLU I， LIANG S Y. Prediction and Control of Residual Stress-based Distortions in the Machining of Aerospace Parts： a Review［J］. Journal of Manufacturing Processes， 2022， 76： 106-122.
[3]	GRISSA R， ZEMZEMI F， FATHALLAH R. Three Approaches for Modeling Residual Stresses Induced by Orthogonal Cutting of AISI316L［J］. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences， 2018， 135： 253-260.
[4]	NASR M N A， NG E G， ELBESTAWI M A. A Modified Time-efficient FE Approach for Predicting Machining-induced Residual Stresses［J］. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design， 2008， 44（4）： 149-161.
[5]	VALIORGUE F， RECH J， HAMDI H， et al. 3D Modeling of Residual Stresses Induced in Finish Turning of an AISI304L Stainless Steel［J］. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture， 2012， 53（1）： 77-90.
[6]	ÖZEL T， ZEREN E. Finite Element Modeling of Stresses Induced by High Speed Machining with Round Edge Cutting Tools［C］∥Manufacturing Engineering and Materials Handling， Parts A and B. ASMEDC， 2005： 1279-1287.
[7]	AKRAM S， JAFFERY S H I， KHAN M， et al. A Numerical Investigation of Effects of Cutting Velocity and Feed Rate on Residual Stresses in Aluminum Alloy Al-6061［J］. International Journal of Materials， Mechanics and Manufacturing， 2015， 3（1）： 26-30.
[8]	LUO Jiaxiang， SUN Yuwen. Optimization of Process Parameters for the Minimization of Surface Residual Stress in Turning Pure Iron Material Using Central Composite Design［J］. Measurement， 2020， 163： 108001.
[9]	韩蕾，史振宇，袭建人，等. 陶瓷基复合材料超声振动辅助加工技术研究现状［J］. 工具技术， 2024， 58（3）： 3-20.
	HAN Lei， SHI Zhenyu， XI Jianren， et al. Research Status of Ultrasonic Vibration Assisted Machining Technology for Ceramic Matrix Composites［J］. Tool Engineering， 2024， 58（3）： 3-20.
[10]	YIN Yueming， YANG Zhen， HU Haifeng， et al. Metric-learning-assisted Domain Adaptation［J］. Neurocomputing， 2021， 454： 268-279.
[11]	李莉，张赛，何强，等. 响应面法在试验设计与优化中的应用［J］. 实验室研究与探索， 2015， 34（8）： 41-45.
	LI Li， ZHANG Sai， HE Qiang， et al. Application of Response Surface Methodology in Experiment Design and Optimization［J］. Research and Exploration in Laboratory， 2015， 34（8）： 41-45.
[12]	EBRAHIMZADEH P， MARTÍNEZ L B P， PARIENTE I F， et al. Optimization of Shot-peening Parameters for Steel AISI 316L via Response Surface Methodology （RSM）： Introducing Two Novel Mechanical Aspects［J］. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology， 2024， 132（1）： 647-667.
[13]	MEHDI H， MISHRA R S. An Experimental Analysis and Optimization of Process Parameters of AA6061 and AA7075 Welded Joint by TIG+FSP Welding Using RSM［J］. Advances in Materials and Processing Technologies， 2022， 8（1）： 598-620.
[14]	XU Fuyang， SUN Yuwen. A Circumscribed Corner Rounding Method Based on Double Cubic B-splines for a Five-axis Linear Tool Path［J］. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology， 2018， 94（1）： 451-462.
[15]	ARRAZOLA P J， KORTABARRIA A， MADARIAGA A， et al. On the Machining Induced Residual Stresses in IN718 Nickel-based Alloy： Experiments and Predictions with Finite Element Simulation［J］. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory， 2014， 41： 87-103.
[16]	左善超，王德成，杜兵，等. 塑性效应对盲孔法测量焊接残余应力影响的研究［J］. 机械工程学报， 2022， 58（16）： 206-214.
	ZUO Shanchao， WANG Decheng， DU Bing， et al. Plasticity Effects in the Hole-drilling Residual Stress Measurements in Welded Structure［J］. Journal of Mechanical Engineering， 2022， 58（16）： 206-214.
[17]	李昊，李华. 盲孔法测量非均匀残余应力时的释放系数［J］. 焊接学报， 2013， 34（6）： 85-88.
	LI Hao， LI Hua. Release Coefficients during Measuring Non-uniform Residual Stress with Blind-hole Method［J］. Transactions of the China Welding Institution， 2013， 34（6）： 85-88.
[18]	马小明，欧清扬. 盲孔法测曲面残余应力时释放系数的数值模拟［J］. 华南理工大学学报（自然科学版）， 2019， 47（12）： 25-31.
	MA Xiaoming， Qingyang OU. Numerical Simulation for Hole-drilling Strain Gage Method Applied on Curved Surface［J］. Journal of South China University of Technology （Natural Science Edition）， 2019， 47（12）： 25-31.
[19]	FAN Zhiqiang， CAO Lixin， LIU Feng. FEM Analysis of the Distortion of Thin-walled Sealing Part Affected by the Machining-induced Residual Stress［J］. IOP Conference Series： Materials Science and Engineering， 2020， 768（4）： 042028.
[20]	DING Hongtao， SHIN Y C. Multi-physics Modeling and Simulations of Surface Microstructure Alteration in Hard Turning［J］. Journal of Materials Processing Technology， 2013， 213（6）： 877-886.