Milling Simulations with a 3-DOF Flexible Planar Robot

Manufacturing technologies are becoming continuously
more diversified over the years. The increasing use of robots for
various applications such as assembling, painting, welding has also
affected the field of machining. Machining robots can deal with
larger workspaces than conventional machine-tools at a lower cost
and thus represent a very promising alternative for machining
applications. Furthermore, their inherent structure ensures them a
great flexibility of motion to reach any location on the workpiece with
the desired orientation. Nevertheless, machining robots suffer from
a lack of stiffness at their joints restricting their use to applications
involving low cutting forces especially finishing operations. Vibratory
instabilities may also happen while machining and deteriorate the
precision leading to scrap parts. Some researchers are therefore
concerned with the identification of optimal parameters in robotic
machining. This paper continues the development of a virtual robotic
machining simulator in order to find optimized cutting parameters in
terms of depth of cut or feed per tooth for example. The simulation
environment combines an in-house milling routine (DyStaMill)
achieving the computation of cutting forces and material removal
with an in-house multibody library (EasyDyn) which is used to
build a dynamic model of a 3-DOF planar robot with flexible links.
The position of the robot end-effector submitted to milling forces is
controlled through an inverse kinematics scheme while controlling
the position of its joints separately. Each joint is actuated through
a servomotor for which the transfer function has been computed
in order to tune the corresponding controller. The output results
feature the evolution of the cutting forces when the robot structure
is deformable or not and the tracking errors of the end-effector.
Illustrations of the resulting machined surfaces are also presented.
The consideration of the links flexibility has highlighted an increase
of the cutting forces magnitude. This proof of concept will aim
to enrich the database of results in robotic machining for potential
improvements in production.




References:
[1] A. Abele, M. Weigold, S. Rothenb¨ucher, “Model and identification of an
industrial robot for machining applications,” Annals of CIRP, vol. 56-1,
pp. 387–390, 2007.
[2] S. Caro, C. Dumas, S. Garnier, B. Furet, “Workpiece placement
optimization for machining operations with a kuka kr270-2 robot,”
IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA),
pp. 2921–2926, May, 2013.
[3] C. Dumas, A. Boudelier, S. Caro, S. Garnier, M. Ritou, B. Furet,
“D´eveloppement d’une cellule robotis´ee de d´etourage des composites,”
M´ecanique et industries, vol. 12, pp. 487–494, 2011.
[4] H. Zhang, J. Wang, G. Zhang, Z. Gan, Z. Pan, H. Cui, Z. Zhu,
“Machining with flexible manipulator: Toward improving robotic
machining performance,” Proc. IEEE-ASME International Conference
on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, pp. 1127–1132, USA, July, 2005.
[5] Z. Pan, H. Zhang, Z. Zhu, J. Wang, “Chatter analysis of robotic
machining process,” Journal of Material Processing Technology,
vol. 173, pp. 301–309, 2006.
[6] J. Tlusty, M. Polacek, “The stability of the machine tool against
self-excited vibration in machining,” ASME International Research in
Production Engineering, pp. 465–474, 1963.
[7] S. G. Mousavi, V. Gagnol, B.C. Bouzgarou, P. Ray, “Dynamic behaviour
model of a machining robot,” ECCOMAS Multibody Dynamics,
pp. 771–779, July, 2013.
[8] U. Schneider, M. Drust, A. Puzik, A. Verl, “Compensation of errors
in robot machining with a parallel 3d-piezo compensation mechanism,”
Procedia CIRP, vol. 7, pp. 305–310, 2013.
[9] N.R. Slavkovic, D.S. Milutinovic, M.M. Glavonjic, “A method for
off-line compensation of cutting force-induced errors in robotic
machining by tool path modification,” Int J Adv Manuf Technol,
Springer, vol. 70, pp. 2083–2096, 2014. [10] C. Dumas, S. Caro, S. Garnier, B. Furet, “Joint stiffness identification of
six-revolute industrial serial robots,” Robotics and Computer-Integrated
Manufacturing, vol. 27, pp. 881–888, 2011.
[11] O. Verlinden, G. Kouroussis, C. Conti, “EasyDyn: a framework based
on free symbolic and numerical tool for teaching multibody systems,” in
Multibody Dynamics 2005, ECCOMAS Thematic Conference, Madrid,
Spain, 21-24 June 2005.
[12] O. Verlinden, L. Ben F´ekih and G. Kouroussis, “Symbolic generation
of the kinematics of multibody systems in EasyDyn: From MuPAD to
Xcas/Giac,” Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Letters, vol. 3, no. 1,
pp. 013012, doi: 10.1063/2.13013012, 2013.
[13] H.N. Huynh, E. Rivi`ere, O. Verlinden, “Integration of machining
simulation within a multibody framework: application to milling,”
IMSD: The 4th Joint International Conference on Multibody System
Dynamics, Canada, June, 2016.
[14] S. Mousavi, V. Gagnol, B. C. Bouzgarrou, P. Ray, “Dynamic model
and stability prediction in robotic machining,” Int J Adv Manuf Technol
(2016), Springer, pp. 1–13, June 2016.
[15] A. Cardona, “Superelements modelling in flexible multibody dynamics,”
Multibody System Dynamics, vol. 4, pp. 245–266, 2000.
[16] O. Verlinden, H.N. Huynh, E. Rivi`ere, “Modelling of flexible bodies
with minimal coordinates by means of the co-rotational formulation,”
The 4th Joint International Conference on Multibody System Dynamics,
Canada, June, 2016.
[17] E. Rivi`ere, E. Filippi, P. Dehombreux, “Forces, vibrations and roughness
prediction in milling using dynamic simulation,” Proceedings, (Fifth
International Conference on High Speed Machining (HSM 2006)), Mars,
Metz, France 2006.
[18] E. Rivi`ere, E. Filippi, P. Dehombreux, “Chatter prediction using
dynamic simulation,” International Review of Mechanical Engineering
(I.RE.M.E.), vol. 1, pp. 78–86, 2007.
[19] G. Peign´e, H. Paris, D. Brissaud, “A model of milled surface generation
for time domain simulation of high-speed cutting,” Proceedings of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, vol. 217, pp. 919–930, 2003.
[20] S. Engin, Y. Altintas, “Mechanics and dynamics of general milling
cutters. Part I: helical end mills,” International Journal of Machine Tools
and Manufacture, vol. 41, pp. 2195–2212, 2001.
[21] John J. Craig, Introduction to Robotic: Mechanics and Control. Pearson,
Prentice Hall, 2005.
[22] C. Renotte, A. VandeWouwer, M. Remy, “A simple frequency domain
approach to the tuning of pid control: design of an interactive software
tool,” Journal A. Benelux Quaterly Journal on Automatic Control,
vol. 42-3, pp. 23–27, 2001.
[23] T. Insperger, B.P. Mann, G. St´ep´an, P.V. Bayly, “Stability of up-milling
and down-milling, part I: alternative analytical methods,” International
Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, vol. 43, pp. 25–34, 2003.
[24] B. Siciliano, L. Sciavicco, L. Villani, G. Oriolo, Robotics: Modelling,
Planning and Control. Springer, 2010.
[25] M.H. Raibert, J.J. Craig, “Hybrid position/force control of
manipulators,” Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and
Control, vol. 103-2, pp. 126–133, 1981.