Experimental investigation and modeling of material removal characteristics in robotic belt grinding considering the effects of cut-in and cut-off

  • Xiaohu Xu
  • Yao Chu
  • Dahu ZhuEmail author
  • Sijie YanEmail author
  • Han Ding


Motivated by our previous work which proposed an improved microforce model considering the effects of cut-in and cut-off in robotic belt grinding operation, we further extend this novel idea into the analysis and optimization of the cut-in and cut-off phenomenon which seriously affects the surface contour accuracy and machining quality. Firstly, a practical material removal rate (MRR) model is introduced to characterize the material removal characteristics, especially at the cut-in and cut-off paths. Then, a strategy framework using the combination of active and passive force control, variable-feed finishing, and longitudinal grinding style is constructed to further enhance the surface profile accuracy and processing quality. Finally, robotic machining experiments of titanium alloy test workpiece are implemented to test the reliability and reasonability of the strategy framework.


Material removal rate Cut-in and cut-off phenomenon Surface profile Optimization strategy 



Linear variable differential transformer


Material removal rate



Experimental grinding depth of cut [mm]


Effective contact width between contact wheel and workpiece [mm]


Modulus of elasticity of the contact wheel [GPa]


Modulus of elasticity of the test workpiece [GPa]


Axial grinding force [N]


Normal grinding force [N]


Tangential grinding force [N]


Preset normal force [N]


Difference value of preset force and real feedback force [N]


Theoretical robotic grinding depth [mm]


Material removal depth at the cut-in path [mm]


Material removal depth at the cut-off path [mm]


Material removal width at the cut-in path [mm]


Material removal width at the cut-off path [mm]


Absolute value of the slopes at the cut-in path


Absolute value of the slopes at the cut-off path


Width of test workpiece [mm]


Length of test workpiece [mm]


Proportion of V1 to the total volume loss V


Proportion of V2 to the total volume loss V


Proportion of V3 to the total volume loss V


Proportion of Qw1 to the total material removal rate Qw


Proportion of Qw2 to the total material removal rate Qw


Proportion of Qw3 to the total material removal rate Qw


Load force which equals to the normal grinding force Fn [N]


Function of the three major parameters: Fn, vc and vr


Optimal grinding parameters


Input cylinder pressure [MPa]


the pressure convert to voltage U [MPa]


Feedback pressure [MPa]


Total material removal rate [mm3/s]


Material removal rate on the cut-in path [mm3/s]


Material removal rate on the normal path [mm3/s]


Material removal rate on the cut-off path [mm3/s]


Total material removal rate based on traditional calculation method [mm3/s]


Radius of contact wheel [mm]


Contact time on the cut-in path [s]


Contact time on the normal path [s]


Contact time on the cut-off path [s]


Contact wheel speed [m/s]


Robot feed velocity [mm/s]


Material removal volume loss on the cut-in path [mm3]


Material removal volume loss on the normal path [mm3]


Material removal volume loss on the cut-off path [mm3]


Force ratio


Pressed depth [mm]


Poisson’s ratio of the contact wheel


Poisson’s ratio of the test workpiece


Funding information

The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the National Nature Science Foundation of China (no. 51675394), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (nos. 2017YFB1303404), the State Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacturing Equipment and Technology (no. DMETKF2018018), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (no. 2017II33GX).


  1. 1.
    Andulkar MV, Chiddarwar SS, Marathe AS (2015) Novel integrated offline trajectory generation approach for robot assisted spray painting operation. J Manuf Syst 37(1):201–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anton F, Anton S, Raileanu S, Borangiu T (2016) Optimizing trajectory points for high speed robot assembly operations. Adv Robot Des Intell Control:127–135Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Šuligoj F, Šekoranja B, Švaco M, Jerbić B (2014) Object tracking with a multiagent robot system and a stereo vision camera. Procedia Eng 69:968–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Matsusaka K, Uemura M, Kawamura S (2016) Highly energy-efficient palletizing tasks using resonance-based robot motion control. J Mech Sci Technol 6(1):8–17Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang X, Shi Y, Yan Y, Gu X (2017) Intelligent welding robot path optimization based on discrete elite PSO. Soft Comput 21(20):5869–5881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhu D, Luo S, Yang L, Chen W, Yan S, Ding H (2015) On energetic assessment of cutting mechanisms in robot-assisted belt grinding of titanium alloys. Tribol Int 90:55–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhao T, Shi Y, Lin X, Duan J, Sun P, Zhang J (2014) Surface roughness prediction and parameters optimization in grinding and polishing process for IBR of aero-engine. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 74:653–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhao P, Shi Y (2014) Posture adaptive control of the flexible grinding head for blisk manufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 70:1989–2001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang H, Gong ZM, Chen XQ, Zhou L (2002) Robotic grinding and polishing for turbine-vane overhaul. J Mater Process Technol 127(2):140–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ren X, Kuhlenkötter B (2008) Real-time simulation and visualization of robotic belt grinding processes. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 35(11):1090–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li W, Xie H, Zhang G, Yan S, Yin Z (2016) 3-D shape matching of a blade surface in robotic grinding applications. IEEE ASME Trans Mech 21(5):2294–2306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xu X, Zhu D, Zhang H, Yan S, Ding H (2017) TCP-based calibration in robot-assisted belt grinding of aero-engine blades using scanner measurement. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 90(1):635–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kountanya R, Guo C (2017) Specific material removal rate calculation in five-axis grinding. J Manuf Sci Eng 139(12):121010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ardashev DV, Dyakonov AA (2017) Mathematical model of the grinding force with account for blunting of abrasive grains of the grinding wheel. J Manuf Sci Eng 139(12):121005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dai C, Ding W, Xu J, Fu Y, Yu T (2017) Influence of grain wear on material removal behavior during grinding nickel-based superalloy with a single diamond grain. Int J Mach Tool Manu 113:49–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jourani A, Hagege B, Bouvier S, Bigerelle M, Zahouani H (2013) Influence of abrasive grain geometry on friction coefficient and wear rate in belt finishing. Tribol Int 59:30–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sun K, Mou S, Qiu J, Wang T, Gao H (2018) Adaptive fuzzy control for non-triangular structural stochastic switched nonlinear systems with full state constraints. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst:1–1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Qiu J, Sun K, Wang T, Gao H (2019) Observer-based fuzzy adaptive event-triggered control for pure-feedback nonlinear systems with prescribed performance. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst:1–1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ji W, Wang L (2019) Industrial robotic machining: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 103(1–4):1239–1255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang W, Liu F, Liu Z, Yun C (2017) Prediction of depth of cut for robotic belt grinding. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 91(1–4):699–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xiao G, Huang Y (2016) Equivalent self-adaptive belt grinding for the real-R edge of an aero-engine precision-forged blade. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 83(9–12):1697–1706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang YJ, Huang Y, Chen YX, Yang ZS (2016) Model of an abrasive belt grinding surface removal contour and its application. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 82(9–12):2113–2122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hou B, Wang Y, Wang F, Ji Z, Liu H (2015) Research on belt grinding for marine propeller blade based on the second-order osculation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 80(9–12):1855–1862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang Y, Hou B, Wang F, Ji Z (2017) A controllable material removal strategy considering force-geometry model of belt grinding processes. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 93(1–4):241–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gao K, Chen H, Zhang X, Ren X, Chen J, Chen X (2019) A novel material removal prediction method based on acoustic sensing and ensemble XGBoost learning algorithm for robotic belt grinding of Inconel 718. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 105:217–232. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wu S, Kazerounian K, Gan Z, Sun Y (2013) A simulation platform for optimal selection of robotic belt grinding system parameters. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 64(1–4):447–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yan S, Xu X, Yang Z, Zhu D, Ding H (2019) An improved robotic abrasive belt grinding force model considering the effects of cut-in and cut-off. J Manuf Process 37:496–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Xu X, Zhu D, Wang J, Yan S, Ding H (2018) Calibration and accuracy analysis of robotic belt grinding system using the ruby probe and criteria sphere. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 51:189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zhu D, Xu X, Yang Z, Zhuang K, Yan S, Ding H (2018) Analysis and assessment of robotic belt grinding mechanisms by force modeling and force control experiments. Tribol Int 120:93-98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marinescu ID, Rowe WB, Dimitrov B, Inaski I (2004) Tribology of abrasive machining processes. William Andrew, Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bre D, Hamrock B (1997) Simplified solution for elliptical-contact deformation between two elastic solids. J Lubr Technol 101(2):231–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Peter E, Hu B (2003) Computational contact dynamics. Southeast University PressGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Xu X, Zhu D, Zhang H, Yan S, Ding H (2019) Application of novel force control strategies to enhance robotic abrasive belt grinding quality of aero-engine blades. Chin J Aeronaut 32(10):2368–2382. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ng WX, Chan HK, Teo WK, Chen IM (2017) Programming a robot for conformance grinding of complex shapes by capturing the tacit knowledge of a skilled operator. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 14(2):1020–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Thomessen T, Lien TK, Sannæs PK (2001) Robot control system for grinding of large hydro power turbines. Ind Robot Int J 28(4):328–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacturing Equipment and TechnologyHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina
  2. 2.Hubei Key Laboratory of Advanced Technology for Automotive ComponentsWuhan University of TechnologyWuhanChina
  3. 3.Hubei Collaborative Innovation Center for Automotive Components TechnologyWuhan University of TechnologyWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations