View More View Less
  • 1 Institute of Manufacturing Science, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Informatics, University of Miskolc, Egyetemváros, H-3515Miskolc, Hungary
Open access

Abstract

This paper presents an experimental study of abrasive waterjet turning of an extrusion aluminum alloy (AlMg0,7Si). The aim of the paper is to determine differences of two methods from the point of view of machined surface quality and the depth of penetration, i.e., the diameter of the parts after the turning process. During the experiments, the traverse speed of the cutting head and the rotation of the turned parts were changed, other parameters, like pressure of the water, abrasive mass flow rate were kept constant. Diameter and some surface roughness parameters of the test parts were measured after the machining. On the base of experimental results, advantages, and disadvantages of two methods are explained in the paper.

Abstract

This paper presents an experimental study of abrasive waterjet turning of an extrusion aluminum alloy (AlMg0,7Si). The aim of the paper is to determine differences of two methods from the point of view of machined surface quality and the depth of penetration, i.e., the diameter of the parts after the turning process. During the experiments, the traverse speed of the cutting head and the rotation of the turned parts were changed, other parameters, like pressure of the water, abrasive mass flow rate were kept constant. Diameter and some surface roughness parameters of the test parts were measured after the machining. On the base of experimental results, advantages, and disadvantages of two methods are explained in the paper.

1 Introduction

Abrasive waterjet machining is a non-traditional technology applied widely nowadays in industry. Abrasive waterjet turning is one of these technologies, which gives the possibility to machine cylindrical, conical, and other rotationally symmetric parts made of hardly machined materials.

At waterjet turning the workpiece rotates with speed v fc, while the jet moves linear in axial direction, with speed v fa. At tangential method, the jet placed in a given radius, at radial method above the workpiece in the symmetric axis of it (Fig. 1). The resulting depth of cut (a p) is the result of several factors in both cases [1, 2].

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Tangential and radial abrasive waterjet turning

Citation: Pollack Periodica 17, 2; 10.1556/606.2021.00400

Material removal is caused by a mixture of abrasive dust, water and air in the jet. When machining with a waterjet, the cutting force is very small, which allows cutting long and relatively small diameter parts [3, 4]. The process is suitable for cutting brittle and difficult-to-cut materials such as glass, ceramics, composites or various super or titanium alloys [5–7].

Performance of different machining technologies usually is made by optimization methods [8]. Quality of the process frequently is characterized by the machined surface [9]. In this research work the waterjet turning process is investigated on base of extent of the material removal and the different parameters of machined surface roughness. Experimental research was carried out for determine the main characteristics of radial and tangential waterjet turning.

2 Experimental conditions and test equipment

In the experiment, the surface of AlMg0.7Si aluminum alloy was machined by abrasive water jet turning.

2.1 The rotating device and the machine-tool

To perform the experiments, a rotating device (Fig. 2) was developed, mounted on a CORTINA DS2600 type, two-dimensional abrasive waterjet cutting machine.

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

Rotating device for abrasive waterjet turning (Source: K. Kun-Bodnár)

Citation: Pollack Periodica 17, 2; 10.1556/606.2021.00400

The rotating device [10] has been designed and constructed in accordance with the following criteria:

  • Machining can be performed on the machine tool and the machine must provide the feed;

  • The mounting of the device must be stable;

  • Device ensures that the workpiece fixturing and rotation;

  • Electronic components must be safety protected from water;

  • Number of rotations of the workpiece must be adjustable.

The equipment consists of three main units: drive, water protection structure and support structure.

2.2 Measurement of roughness of machined surfaces

Roughness of the machined surfaces was measured in one of the laboratories of the Institute of Manufacturing Sciences at University of Miskolc on an AltiSurf 520 surface topographical measuring machine (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

AltiSurf 520 surface topographical measuring machine (Source: photo by Zs. Maros)

Citation: Pollack Periodica 17, 2; 10.1556/606.2021.00400

The device has three type of measuring head mechanical (needle), confocal and laser. The measurements of machined surfaces were accomplished with laser head because of the relative high surface roughness of machined surfaces.

The profile roughness measurements were carried out in axial direction, on 3 locations on each test specimen, at both tangential and also radial waterjet turning. The positions on the mantle were marked about 120° apart. The spatial roughness measurements were carried out on one 8 × 4 mm area, on the middle of the cylindrical surfaces.

After machining, profile (2D) and spatial (3D) roughness characteristics were also determined to characterize the roughness of the surfaces.

To visually inspect the machined surfaces, photographs of the surfaces were taken with a ZEISS Stereo Discovery.V8 microscope.

2.3 Experimental settings

During the cutting experiments, the water pressure was kept constant and the feed speed and workpiece speed were varied. The setting data is shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Parameters of experimental settings

Test specimenMethodma

g min−1
p

bar
n

1 min−1
vf

mm min−1
Test specimen size
diameter [mm]length [mm]
1.1.(tangential)4003,000200104830.2
2.(radial)4003,000200104830.2
2.1.(tangential)4003,000200547.830.2
2.(radial)4003,000200547.830.2
3.1.(tangential)4003,000200247.930.2
2.(radial)4003,000200247.930.2
4.1.(tangential)4003,0001001547.830.1
2.(radial)4003,0001001547.830.1
5.1.(tangential)4003,0001001047.830.2
2.(radial)4003,0001001047.830.2
6.1.(tangential)4003,00030054830.2
2.(radial)4003,00030054830.2
7.1.(tangential)4003,00030034830.2
2.(radial)4003,00030034830.2
8.1.(tangential)4003,00030024830.2
2.(radial)4003,00030024830.2

Waterjet turning experiments were performed on the same specimens with radial and tangential adjustment with the same technological parameters (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.

Surfaces machined by radial (left) and tangential (right) waterjet turning (feed speed 2 mm min−1, number of rotation 200 l min−1) (photo by K. Kun-Bodnár)

Citation: Pollack Periodica 17, 2; 10.1556/606.2021.00400

Thanks to the surfaces placed on the same specimen, the two types of turning methods became visually comparable.

Describe the applied methods, experiments and procedures in sufficient detail to allow other authors to reproduce the result. This part may have subheadings.

3 Experimental results

The comparison of the different methods was made partly based on the thickness of the removed layer and partly based on the roughness of the machined surfaces.

The thickness of the removed material layer was determined with measurement of the diameter of the specimens before and after the waterjet turning. The change in the thickness of the removed layer is shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.

Thickness of deposited material layer for radial and tangential waterjet turning as a function of feed speed (motor rotation 300 l min−1, abrasive mass flow rate 400 g min−1)

Citation: Pollack Periodica 17, 2; 10.1556/606.2021.00400

It can be seen in Fig. 5 that the radial turning can remove a thicker layer of material in all cases under the same technological parameters, i.e., it is more efficient in terms of material removal. It can also be seen that increasing the feed rate, the thickness of the deposited layer decreases.

After the experiment more parameters of surface roughness characteristics were measured. In the industry most widely used parameter is the average surface roughness (R a).

Figure 6 shows the change in the average surface roughness (R a) from the method and the traverse feed speed at the same experimental settings as Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.
Fig. 6.

Change in average roughness as a function of feed speed (motor rotation 300 l min−1, abrasive mass flow rate 400 g min−1) with radial and tangential water jet turning

Citation: Pollack Periodica 17, 2; 10.1556/606.2021.00400

Based on Fig. 6, it can be seen, that the machined surfaces with more favorable roughness can be obtained by tangential water jet turning. The change in roughness as a function of feed is not clear.

Similar characteristic can be observed in the change of total height (R t) of roughness profile (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7.
Fig. 7.

Change in total height of roughness as a function of feed speed (motor rotation 300 1 min−1, abrasive mass flow rate 400 g min−1) with radial and tangential water jet turning

Citation: Pollack Periodica 17, 2; 10.1556/606.2021.00400

In Fig. 7 the values of radial cut are always higher than the tangential, especially at lower feed speed. Total height parameter decreases at radial turning in function off feed speed. At tangential turning characteristic tendency cannot be established. Extent of total height roughness is about 5–6 times higher than average roughness of the same surfaces. This phenomenon is similar to mechanical turning, where this ratio is about 5.

The relative material ratio (R mr) of the machined surfaces was also measured after the cutting. This surface roughness parameter is a functional parameter and characteristics the extent of the bearing surface. As higher is the material ratio as better slip and wear properties has the machined surface.

In Fig. 8 can be seen that material ratio of the surfaces is higher at tangential waterjet turning then at radial one. At tangential turning the values increase in function of feed speed. This mean that better functional surfaces can be reached at higher feed speed. The radial turning does not show clear trend.

Fig. 8.
Fig. 8.

Change in relative material ratio as a function of feed speed (motor rotation 300 1 min−1, abrasive mass flow rate 400 g min−1) with radial and tangential water jet turning

Citation: Pollack Periodica 17, 2; 10.1556/606.2021.00400

4 Conclusions

Summarizing the results, based on the experiments comparing the two types of water jet turning, the following conclusions can be made:

  • For machining with the same technological parameters, a higher material removal efficiency can be achieved with the radial process;

  • The thickness of the removed material layer clearly decreases with increasing feed rate;

  • For tangential process, the set depth of cut is not equal to the thickness of the layer removed;

  • The average roughness of the surface is smaller in the case of the tangential process and it does not show a clear change as a function of the feed speed;

  • Total height parameter decreases at radial turning in function of feed speed. At tangential turning characteristic tendency cannot be established;

  • Radial process is better from the point of relative material ratio parameter of the machined surfaces, higher feed speed results in better sliding and wear properties;

  • Tangential waterjet turning is easier to handle process comparing to the radial waterjet turning.

In summary, abrasive water jet turning can be used to machine materials well, but ensuring the required size is not accurate for finishing. With tangential abrasive water jet turning, better surface quality can be achieved, with radial process; greater material removal efficiency can be achieved. Further studies are needed to clarify the ongoing processes.

References

  • [1]

    W. Li , H. Zhu , J. Wang , Y. M. Ali , and C. Huang , “An investigation into the radial-mode abrasive waterjet turning process on high tensile steels,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., vol. 77. pp. 365376, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    D. Liu , C. Huangn , J. Wang , H. Zhu , P. Yao , and Z. W. Liu , “Modeling and optimization of operating parameters for abrasive waterjet turning alumina ceramics using response surface methodology combined with Box–Behnken design,” Ceramics Int., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 78997908, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [3]

    R. Manu and N. R. Babu , “An erosion-based model for abrasive waterjet turning of ductile materials,” Wear, vol. 266, nos 11–12, pp. 10911097, 2009.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    M. Zohoor , I. Zohourkari , F. Cacciatore , and M. Annoni , “Influence of machining parameters on part geometrical error in abrasive waterjet offset-mode turning,” in Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B: J. Eng. Manuf., vol. 229, no. 12, 2015, pp. 21252133.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [5]

    D. A. Axinte , J. P. Stepanian , M. C. Kong and J. McGourlay , “Abrasive waterjet turning - An efficient method to profile and dress grinding wheels,” Int. J. Machine Tools Manuf., vol. 49, nos 3–4, pp. 351356, 2009.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [6]

    R. Kovacevic , M. Hashish , R. Mohan , M. Ramulu , T. J. Kim , and E. S. Geskin , “State of the art of research and development in abrasive waterjet machining,” J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. , vol. 119, no. 48, pp. 776785, 1997.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [7]

    M. Mazurkiewicz , “A manufacturing tool for a new century,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., vol. 106, nos 1–3, pp. 112118, 2000.

  • [8]

    S. Alsamia , D. S. Ibrahim , and H. N. Ghafil , “Optimization of drilling performance using various metaheuristics,” Pollack Period., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 8085, 2021.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [9]

    G. Tóth , Á. Drégely-Kiss , and B. Palásti-Kovács , “Analysis of micro-geometric parameters of cut surfaces,” Pollack Period., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 5566, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    K. Kun-Bodnár , J. Kundrák , and Z. Maros , “Machining of rotationally symmetric parts with abrasive waterjet,” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 448, 2018, Paper no. 012053.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [1]

    W. Li , H. Zhu , J. Wang , Y. M. Ali , and C. Huang , “An investigation into the radial-mode abrasive waterjet turning process on high tensile steels,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., vol. 77. pp. 365376, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    D. Liu , C. Huangn , J. Wang , H. Zhu , P. Yao , and Z. W. Liu , “Modeling and optimization of operating parameters for abrasive waterjet turning alumina ceramics using response surface methodology combined with Box–Behnken design,” Ceramics Int., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 78997908, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [3]

    R. Manu and N. R. Babu , “An erosion-based model for abrasive waterjet turning of ductile materials,” Wear, vol. 266, nos 11–12, pp. 10911097, 2009.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    M. Zohoor , I. Zohourkari , F. Cacciatore , and M. Annoni , “Influence of machining parameters on part geometrical error in abrasive waterjet offset-mode turning,” in Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B: J. Eng. Manuf., vol. 229, no. 12, 2015, pp. 21252133.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [5]

    D. A. Axinte , J. P. Stepanian , M. C. Kong and J. McGourlay , “Abrasive waterjet turning - An efficient method to profile and dress grinding wheels,” Int. J. Machine Tools Manuf., vol. 49, nos 3–4, pp. 351356, 2009.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [6]

    R. Kovacevic , M. Hashish , R. Mohan , M. Ramulu , T. J. Kim , and E. S. Geskin , “State of the art of research and development in abrasive waterjet machining,” J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. , vol. 119, no. 48, pp. 776785, 1997.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [7]

    M. Mazurkiewicz , “A manufacturing tool for a new century,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., vol. 106, nos 1–3, pp. 112118, 2000.

  • [8]

    S. Alsamia , D. S. Ibrahim , and H. N. Ghafil , “Optimization of drilling performance using various metaheuristics,” Pollack Period., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 8085, 2021.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [9]

    G. Tóth , Á. Drégely-Kiss , and B. Palásti-Kovács , “Analysis of micro-geometric parameters of cut surfaces,” Pollack Period., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 5566, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    K. Kun-Bodnár , J. Kundrák , and Z. Maros , “Machining of rotationally symmetric parts with abrasive waterjet,” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 448, 2018, Paper no. 012053.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
Submit Your Manuscript
 
The author instructions template is available in MS Word.
Please, download the file from HERE.

 

Senior editors

Editor(s)-in-Chief: Iványi, Amália

Editor(s)-in-Chief: Iványi, Péter

 

Scientific Secretary

Miklós M. Iványi

Editorial Board

  • Bálint Bachmann (Institute of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Jeno Balogh (Department of Civil Engineering Technology, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA)
  • Radu Bancila (Department of Geotechnical Engineering and Terrestrial Communications Ways, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, “Politehnica” University Timisoara, Romania)
  • Charalambos C. Baniotopolous (Department of Civil Engineering, Chair of Sustainable Energy Systems, Director of Resilience Centre, School of Engineering, University of Birmingham, U.K.)
  • Oszkar Biro (Graz University of Technology, Institute of Fundamentals and Theory in Electrical Engineering, Austria)
  • Ágnes Borsos (Institute of Architecture, Department of Interior, Applied and Creative Design, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Matteo Bruggi (Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile e Ambientale, Politecnico di Milano, Italy)
  • Petra Bujňáková (Department of Structures and Bridges, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Žilina, Slovakia)
  • Anikó Borbála Csébfalvi (Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Smart Technology and Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Mirjana S. Devetaković (Faculty of Architecture, University of Belgrade, Serbia)
  • Szabolcs Fischer (Department of Transport Infrastructure and Water Resources Engineering, Faculty of Architerture, Civil Engineering and Transport Sciences Széchenyi István University, Győr, Hungary)
  • Radomir Folic (Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad Serbia)
  • Jana Frankovská (Department of Geotechnics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, Slovakia)
  • János Gyergyák (Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Institute of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Kay Hameyer (Chair in Electromagnetic Energy Conversion, Institute of Electrical Machines, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technology, RWTH Aachen University, Germany)
  • Elena Helerea (Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Applied Physics, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Transilvania University of Brasov, Romania)
  • Ákos Hutter (Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, Institute of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technolgy, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Károly Jármai (Institute of Energy and Chemical Machinery, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Informatics, University of Miskolc, Hungary)
  • Teuta Jashari-Kajtazi (Department of Architecture, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, University of Prishtina, Kosovo)
  • Róbert Kersner (Department of Technical Informatics, Institute of Information and Electrical Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Rita Kiss  (Biomechanical Cooperation Center, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary)
  • István Kistelegdi  (Department of Building Structures and Energy Design, Institute of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Stanislav Kmeť (President of University Science Park TECHNICOM, Technical University of Kosice, Slovakia)
  • Imre Kocsis  (Department of Basic Engineering Research, Faculty of Engineering, University of Debrecen, Hungary)
  • László T. Kóczy (Department of Information Sciences, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Informatics and Electrical Engineering, University of Győr, Hungary)
  • Dražan Kozak (Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Croatia)
  • György L. Kovács (Department of Technical Informatics, Institute of Information and Electrical Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Balázs Géza Kövesdi (Department of Structural Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Budapest University of Engineering and Economics, Budapest, Hungary)
  • Tomáš Krejčí (Department of Mechanics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Czech Republic)
  • Jaroslav Kruis (Department of Mechanics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Czech Republic)
  • Miklós Kuczmann (Department of Automations, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Informatics and Electrical Engineering, Széchenyi István University, Győr, Hungary)
  • Tibor Kukai (Department of Engineering Studies, Institute of Smart Technology and Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Maria Jesus Lamela-Rey (Departamento de Construcción e Ingeniería de Fabricación, University of Oviedo, Spain)
  • János Lógó  (Department of Structural Mechanics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary)
  • Carmen Mihaela Lungoci (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Universitatea Transilvania Brasov, Romania)
  • Frédéric Magoulés (Department of Mathematics and Informatics for Complex Systems, Centrale Supélec, Université Paris Saclay, France)
  • Gabriella Medvegy (Department of Interior, Applied and Creative Design, Institute of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Tamás Molnár (Department of Visual Studies, Institute of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Ferenc Orbán (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Smart Technology and Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Zoltán Orbán (Department of Civil Engineering, Institute of Smart Technology and Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Dmitrii Rachinskii (Department of Mathematical Sciences, The University of Texas at Dallas, Texas, USA)
  • Chro Radha (Chro Ali Hamaradha) (Sulaimani Polytechnic University, Technical College of Engineering, Department of City Planning, Kurdistan Region, Iraq)
  • Maurizio Repetto (Department of Energy “Galileo Ferraris”, Politecnico di Torino, Italy)
  • Zoltán Sári (Department of Technical Informatics, Institute of Information and Electrical Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Grzegorz Sierpiński (Department of Transport Systems and Traffic Engineering, Faculty of Transport, Silesian University of Technology, Katowice, Poland)
  • Zoltán Siménfalvi (Institute of Energy and Chemical Machinery, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Informatics, University of Miskolc, Hungary)
  • Andrej Šoltész (Department of Hydrology, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, Slovakia)
  • Zsolt Szabó (Faculty of Information Technology and Bionics, Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Hungary)
  • Mykola Sysyn (Chair of Planning and Design of Railway Infrastructure, Institute of Railway Systems and Public Transport, Technical University of Dresden, Germany)
  • András Timár (Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)
  • Barry H. V. Topping (Heriot-Watt University, UK, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Pécs, Hungary)

POLLACK PERIODICA
Pollack Mihály Faculty of Engineering
Institute: University of Pécs
Address: Boszorkány utca 2. H–7624 Pécs, Hungary
Phone/Fax: (36 72) 503 650

E-mail: peter.ivanyi@mik.pte.hu 

or amalia.ivanyi@mik.pte.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • SCOPUS

 

2021  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
not indexed
Journal Impact Factor not indexed
Rank by Impact Factor

not indexed

Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
not indexed
5 Year
Impact Factor
not indexed
Journal Citation Indicator not indexed
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator

not indexed

Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
12
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,26
Scimago Quartile Score Civil and Structural Engineering (Q3)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) (Q3)
Computer Science Applications (Q4)
Modeling and Simulation (Q4)
Software (Q4)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1,5
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Civil and Structural Engineering 232/326 (Q3)
Computer Science Applications 536/747 (Q3)
General Materials Science 329/455 (Q3)
Modeling and Simulation 228/303 (Q4)
Software 326/398 (Q4)
Scopus
SNIP
0,613

2020  
Scimago
H-index
11
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,257
Scimago
Quartile Score
Civil and Structural Engineering Q3
Computer Science Applications Q3
Materials Science (miscellaneous) Q3
Modeling and Simulation Q3
Software Q3
Scopus
Cite Score
340/243=1,4
Scopus
Cite Score Rank
Civil and Structural Engineering 219/318 (Q3)
Computer Science Applications 487/693 (Q3)
General Materials Science 316/455 (Q3)
Modeling and Simulation 217/290 (Q4)
Software 307/389 (Q4)
Scopus
SNIP
1,09
Scopus
Cites
321
Scopus
Documents
67
Days from submission to acceptance 136
Days from acceptance to publication 239
Acceptance
Rate
48%

 

2019  
Scimago
H-index
10
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,262
Scimago
Quartile Score
Civil and Structural Engineering Q3
Computer Science Applications Q3
Materials Science (miscellaneous) Q3
Modeling and Simulation Q3
Software Q3
Scopus
Cite Score
269/220=1,2
Scopus
Cite Score Rank
Civil and Structural Engineering 206/310 (Q3)
Computer Science Applications 445/636 (Q3)
General Materials Science 295/460 (Q3)
Modeling and Simulation 212/274 (Q4)
Software 304/373 (Q4)
Scopus
SNIP
0,933
Scopus
Cites
290
Scopus
Documents
68
Acceptance
Rate
67%

 

Pollack Periodica
Publication Model Hybrid
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 900 EUR/article
Printed Color Illustrations 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription fee 2022 Online subsscription: 327 EUR / 411 USD 321
Print + online subscription: 393 EUR / 492 USD
Subscription fee 2023 Online subsscription: 336 EUR / 411 USD
Print + online subscription: 405 EUR / 492 USD
Subscription Information Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content.
Purchase per Title Individual articles are sold on the displayed price.

 

Pollack Periodica
Language English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation
2006
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
3
Founder Akadémiai Kiadó
Founder's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 1788-1994 (Print)
ISSN 1788-3911 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Feb 2022 0 5 6
Mar 2022 0 27 26
Apr 2022 0 14 12
May 2022 0 22 16
Jun 2022 0 26 8
Jul 2022 0 7 6
Aug 2022 0 3 2