Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40870224›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Wear Characteristics of WC-Co Cutting Tools Obtained by the U-FAST Method During Particleboard Milling.

Joanna Wachowicz, Zbigniew Bałaga, Piotr Podziewski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Joanna WachowiczInstitute of Wood Sciences and Furniture, Department of Mechanical Processing of Wood, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska Street, 166, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7942-3959
Zbigniew BałagaFaculty of Production Engineering and Materials Technology, Czestochowa University of Technology, Armii Krajowej Street, 19, 42-201 Czestochowa, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7004-7037
Piotr PodziewskiInstitute of Wood Sciences and Furniture, Department of Mechanical Processing of Wood, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska Street, 166, 02-787 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-2628-5062

Funding

National Science Centre DEC- 2021/05/X/ST5/00868Warsaw University of Life Sciences Science development fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article presents the wear characteristics of the working surface of WC-Co (Tungsten Carbide-Cobalt) tungsten carbide tools obtained using the innovative U-FAST (Upgraded Field-Assisted Sintering Technology) method for particleboard machining. Three groups of tools with a similar chemical composition but differing WC (Tungsten Carbide) grain sizes were tested. Milling tests were carried out on a CNC (Computer Numerical Control) machine tool with the following cutting parameters: spindle rotation at 15,000 rpm, a feed rate of 0.25 mm per tooth, and a feed rate of 3.75. The experimental results show that tools with submicron WC grit sizes of 0.4 µm and 0.8 µm have the longest tool life. Wear of the cutting edges occurred through the removal of the cobalt bond between the tungsten carbide grains, leading to fracture and mechanical removal of the grains from the cutting edge surface. The similarities in the relative wear characteristics of blades with submicron tungsten carbide grain sizes suggest that micro-abrasion and bond phase extrusion may be the main wear mechanisms under the experimental conditions. Nanometric WC grain size significantly influences tool wear through chipping and cracking.

Indexed as

cemented carbidescutting toolsparticleboard machiningsinteringWC-Co

Identifiers

PMID40870224
PMCPMC12387649

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.