single-au.php

IJAT Vol.4 No.3 pp. 268-272
doi: 10.20965/ijat.2010.p0268
(2010)

Paper:

Effect of Workpiece Location on Manipulability Measure in 5-Axis-Controlled Machine Tools

Yoshio Mizugaki

Department of Mechanical and Control Engineering, Kyushu Institute of Technology, Tobata, Kitakyushu, 804-8550 Fukuoka, Japan

Received:
January 5, 2010
Accepted:
February 13, 2010
Published:
May 5, 2010
Keywords:
CAM, inverse kinematics analysis, Manipulability measure, workpiece location, multiaxis-controlled machine tool
Abstract

This paper clarifies the effects of workpiece location in a 5-axis-controlled machine tool from the viewpoint of Inverse kinematics including Manipulability measure: an index representing the variance of movement of end-effector in a serial linkage. Firstly the importance of Inverse kinematics in Computer Aided Manufacturing is emphasized and then Singularity and Manipulability measure are expanded for multiaxis-controlled machine tools. Secondly the computational results of Manipulability measure for different workpiece locations and tool orientations show that setting the workpiece in the centre of the rotary work-table is most preferable. Regardless of large differences in Manipulability measure at different locations, there were few differences of the resultant cutting force in machining experiments. Finally the brief conclusion is mentioned.

Cite this article as:
Y. Mizugaki, “Effect of Workpiece Location on Manipulability Measure in 5-Axis-Controlled Machine Tools,” Int. J. Automation Technol., Vol.4, No.3, pp. 268-272, 2010.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] G. Spur, F.-L. Krause, H. J. Germer, and R. Rieger, “NC Programming and Dynamic Simulation Based on Solid Models in CIM Strategy,” Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, Vol.4, No.3 & 4, pp. 471-481, 1988.
  2. [2] J.-P. Kruth, et al., “Optimization and Dynamic Adaptation of the Cutter Inclination during Five-Axis Milling of Sculptured Surfaces,” Annals of CIRP, 43/1/1994, pp. 443-446, 1994.
  3. [3] K. Morishige and Y. Takeuchi, “Tool Attitude Determination for Five-Axis Control Machining Based on Configuration Space –Consideration of Tool Shape and Safety First Machining Strategy–,” Jour. Japan Society for Precision Engineering, Vol.66, No.7, pp. 1140-1144, 2000 (in Japanese).
  4. [4] A. Rangarajan and D. Dornfeld, “Efficient Tool Paths and Part Orientation for Face Milling,” Annals of CIRP, 53/1/2004, pp. 73-76, 2004.
  5. [5] B. Lauwers, J.-P. Kruth, et al., “Efficient NC-Programming of Multi-Axes Milling Machines through the Integration of Tool Path Generation and NC-Simulation,” Annals of CIRP, 49/1/2000, pp. 367-370, 2000.
  6. [6] B. Lauwers, G. Kiswanto, and J.-P. Kruth, “Development of a Fiveaxis Milling Tool Path Generation Algorithm Based on Faceted Models,” Annals of the CIRP, 52/1/2003, pp. 85-88, 2003.
  7. [7] Y. Mizugaki, K. Kikkawa. H. Terai, and M. Hao, “Theoretical Estimation of Machined Surface Profile Based on Cutting Edge Movement and Tool Orientation in Ball-nosed End Milling,” Annals of CIRP, 52/1/2003, pp. 49-52, 2003.
  8. [8] T. Yoshikawa, “Manipulability Measure of Robotic Mechanism,” International Journal of Robotic Research, Vol.4, No.2, pp. 3-9, 1984.
  9. [9] H. Terai, T. Asao, and Y. Mizugaki, “Geometric Simulation of Ball End Milling and Application for the Precise Machining,” Proc. of the 10th CIRP International Workshop on Modeling of Machining Operations, pp. 217-222, 2007.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, IE9,10,11, Opera.

Last updated on Nov. 08, 2019