Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study elucidates the mechanisms behind tribologically relevant surface roughness variations in a two-stage honing process for cast-iron engine cylinder liners. By decomposing the honing stroke into six kinematic phases, analytical force models are developed to relate hydraulic mandrel pressure to phase-dependent radial feed forces at the stone–liner interface. Surface roughness measurements at multiple axial locations show that, for both single-stage rough honing and two-stage rough plus plateau honing, the top sections of the liners remain approximately 10% rougher than the middle regions (mean over all test conditions; standard deviation 1.8%). After plateau honing, the surface parameters exhibit a substantial reduction: Ra decreased by a factor of 4.5 and additional reductions of 3.2 in R3z, 7.8 in Rpk, 6.4 in Rk, 3.4 in Rvk, 2.6 in Mr1 and 1.1 in Mr2, confirming the strong bearing-area enhancement of the plateau step. The force model predicts approximately 30% higher radial expansion pressure in the upper stroke phases compared with the central phases (evaluated over the hydraulic-pressure range P = 40–80%), which is identified as the primary driver of systematic axial roughness variations. Scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy reveal deep hemispherical pits associated with graphite excavation, shown to be a major source of random roughness fluctuations in grey cast-iron liners. The combined insights from phase-resolved force modelling and detailed surface characterisation provide a basis for improved measurement strategies and process control aimed at stabilising cylinder-liner topography for enhanced lubrication and friction performance in piston ring–liner systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Totuk et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: