A virtual material-based static modeling and parameter identification method for a BT40 spindle–holder taper joint

  • Hao Guo
  • Jianfu Zhang
  • Pingfa Feng
  • Zhijun Wu
  • Dingwen Yu
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

The static characteristics of a taper joint interface play a key role in the static behavior of the entire spindle system of a machine tool. In this study, a method of modeling a taper joint and identifying its parameters is proposed to describe the static behavior of a taper joint. First, a static model is constructed based on a virtual material layer and equilibrium functions established to identify the unknown parameters of the virtual material. Then, an experimental method is introduced to acquire joint interface data for parameter identification based on a designed spindle–holder characteristic test system. In particular, a BT40 taper joint holder is studied taking into account the pre-force at the end of the holder. The study results show that the static stiffness increased initially with the growth in the pre-force and became relatively stable after reaching a value which could be explained by its microstructure. According to the simulation results, the effectiveness of the proposed virtual material modeling method, compared with previous methods, are discussed. The estimated parameters are informative for the design and manufacture of the spindle.

Keywords

Taper joint Static modeling Parameters identification Machine tool 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Tian HL, Li B, Liu HQ, Mao KM, Peng FY, Huang XL (2011) A new method of virtual material hypothesis-based dynamic modeling on fixed joint interface in machine tools. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 51(3):239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Xu C, Zhang JF, Wu ZJ, Yu DW, Feng PF (2013) Dynamic modeling and parameters identification of a spindle–holder taper joint. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 67(5–8):1517–1525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Xu C, Zhang JF, Feng PF, Yu DW, Wu ZJ (2014) Characteristics of stiffness and contact stress distribution of a spindle-holder taper joint under clamping and centrifugal forces. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 82–83:21–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Song Y, Hartwigsenb CJ, McFarlanda DM, Vakakisb AF, Bergman LA (2004) Simulation of dynamics of beam structures with bolted joints using adjusted iwan beam elements. J Sound Vib 273(1–2):249–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Agapiou J, Rivin E, Xie C (1995) Tool holder–spindle interfaces for CNC machine tools. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 44(1):383–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shamine DM, Shin YC (2000) Analysis of no. 50 taper joint stiffness under axial and radial loading. J Manuf Process 2(3):167–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aoyama T, Inasaki I (2001) Performances of HSK tool interfaces under high rotational speed. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 50(1):281–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhang JF, Feng PF, Chen C, Yu DW, Wu ZJ (2013) A method for thermal performance modeling and simulation of machine tools. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 68(5–8):1517–1527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Agapiou JS (2008) Estimating the static stiffness for a spindle-toolholder-tooling system. Mach Sci Technol 12(1):77–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Olvera D, López de Lacalle LN, Compeán FI, Fz-Valdivielso A, Lamikiz A, Campa FJ (2012) Analysis of the tool tip radial stiffness of turn-milling centers. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 60(9–12):883–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smith S, Jacobs TP, Halley J (1999) The effect of drawbar force on metal removal rate in milling. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 48(1):293–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stephenson DA, Agapiou J S (2005). Metal cutting theory and practice (second edition). CRC press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shen ZY, Zhang JF, Wu ZJ, Feng PF, Xu C (2011) Modeling and experimental study on static characteristic of BT tool holder-spindle interface. Adv Mater Res 311:726–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maeda O, Cao Y, Altintas Y (2005) Expert spindle design system. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 45(4–5):537–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ertürk A, Özgüven HN, Budak E (2006) Analytical modeling of spindle–tool dynamics on machine tools using Timoshenko beam model and receptance coupling for the prediction of tool point FRF. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 46(15):1901–1912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Friedman Z, Kosmatka JB (1993) An improved two-node Timoshenko beam finite element. Comput Struct 47(3):473–481CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kosmatka JB (1995) An improved two-node finite element for stability and natural frequencies of axial-loaded Timoshenko beams. Comput Struct 57(1):141–149CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Namazi M (2007) Modeling and identification of tool holder—spindle interface dynamics. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 47(9):1333–1341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Greenwood JA, Williamson JBP (1966) Contact of nominally flat surfaces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Ser A J Math Phys Sci 295(1442):300–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hao Guo
    • 1
  • Jianfu Zhang
    • 1
  • Pingfa Feng
    • 1
  • Zhijun Wu
    • 1
  • Dingwen Yu
    • 1
  1. 1.The State Key Laboratory of Tribology, Department of Mechanical EngineeringTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations