Theoretical error compensation when measuring an S-shaped test piece

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 58 Downloads

Abstract

S-shaped test piece aims to assess the performance of five-axis numerical control (NC) machine tools. When the draft international standard (DIS) was introduced at the 79th ISO/TC39SC2 meeting, it was agreed that this test piece would be included. The S-shaped test piece, however, has undeveloped surfaces, which contribute to theoretical error. Because the test piece is used to assess the performance of machine tools and to conduct error tracing, theoretical error should not be included in the detection results obtained by the coordinate measuring machine (CMM). Therefore, the S-shaped test piece, excluding the influences of theoretical error, is crucial to research. This paper calculates the theoretical error of the S-shaped test piece when processed with the single-point offset (SPO) position method and proposes pre-compensation (PRC) and post-compensation (POC) methods to eliminate the influences of theoretical error. We conducted a theoretical analysis to compare three methods, the two compensation methods and the one uncompensated method, and verified the results through actual experiments. Research from principle and practice demonstrates that both the PRC and POC methods compensated for theoretical error up to 0.01 mm and that PRC is more accurate when considering the difference of approximately ±0.0015 mm.

Keywords

Five-axis numerical control machining Measurement Theoretical error Compensation S-shaped test piece 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Jha BK, Kumar A (2003) Analysis of geometric errors associated with five-axis machining centre in improving the quality of cam profile. Int J Mach Tool Manu 43(6):629–636. doi: 10.1016/S0890-6955(02)00268-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Soichi I, Goh S, Kunitaka T (2014) ‘Open-loop’ tracking interferometer for machine tool volumetric error measurement—two-dimensional case. Precis Eng 38(3):666–672. doi: 10.1016/j.precisioneng.2014.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Xiang S, Yang J, Zhang Y (2014) Using a double ball bar to identify position-independent geometric errors on the rotary axes of five-axis machine tools. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 70(9):2071–2082. doi: 10.1007/s00170-013-5432-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hong C, Ibaraki S, Oyama C (2012) Graphical presentation of error motions of rotary axes on a five-axis machine tool by static R-test with separating the influence of squareness errors of linear axes. Int J Mach Tool Manu 59(2):24–33. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2012.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Matsushita T, Oki T, Matsubara A (2008) The accuracy of cone frustum machined by five-axis machine tool with tilting table. J Jpn Soc Precis Eng 74(6):632–636. doi: 10.2493/jjspe.74.632 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weikert S (2004) R-test, a new device for accuracy measurements on five axis machine tools. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 53(1):429–432. doi: 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60732-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mou WP, Song ZY, Guo ZP, Tang LM (2012) A machining test to reflect dynamic machining accuracy of five-axis machine tools. Adv Mater Res 622-623:414–419. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.622-623.414 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guan LW, Mo J, Fu M, Wang LP (2017) An improved positioning method for flank milling of s-shaped test piece. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–16. doi: 10.1007/s00170-017-0180-x
  9. 9.
    Su Z, Wang L (2015) Latest development of a new standard for the testing of five-axis machine tools using an S-shaped test piece. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 229(7). doi: 10.1177/0954405414560780
  10. 10.
    Wang W, Zhang XY, Mei X (2016) Research on the mechanism of free surface contour error caused by the stiffness of feed system of five-axis machine tools. J Mech Eng 52(21). doi: 10.3901/JME.2016.21.146
  11. 11.
    Wang W, Jiang Z, Li Q, Tao W (2015) A new test part to identify performance of five-axis machine tool-part ii validation of s part. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 79(5):739–756. doi: 10.1007/s00170-015-6869-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li DU, Zheng CZ, Bian ZY, Zhao XD, Wang W (2015) Research on reconstruction and optimization of the “S”shaped test piece. Modular Machine Tool & Automatic Manufacturing Technique. doi: 10.13462/j.cnki.mmtamt.2015.04.002
  13. 13.
    Du L, Zhang X, Zhao S, Li J (2014) Research on five-axis cnc machining method of S shaped detection test piece. China Mech Eng 25(21):2907–2911. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-132X.2014.21.013 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Du L, Zhang X, Wang W, Fu ZH, Shi RB (2014) Research on properties of “S” shaped test piece on synthesis dynamic accuracy detection of five-axis cnc machine tools. J Univ Electron Sci Technol China 43(4):629–635. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0548.2014.04.028 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Song Z, Cui Y (2010) S-shape detection test piece and a detection method for detecting the precision of the numerical control milling machine. US, US 20100004777 A1Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liang Q, Wang YZ, Hong Y, Zhen Y (2008) Cutting path planning for ruled surface impellers. Chin J Aeronaut 21(5):462–471. doi: 10.1016/S1000-9361(08)60060-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chiou JCJ (2004) Accurate tool position for five-axis ruled surface machining by swept envelope approach. Comput Aided Des 36(10):967–974. doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2003.10.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gong H, Cao LX, Liu J (2005) Improved positioning of cylindrical cutter for flank milling ruled surfaces. Comput Aided Des 37(12):1205–1213. doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2004.11.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gong H, Fang FZ, Hu XT, Cao LX, Liu J (2010) Optimization of tool positions locally based on the bceltp for 5-axis machining of free-form surfaces. Comput Aided Des 42(6):558–570. doi: 10.1016/j.cad.2010.02.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Senatore J, Monies F, Redonnet JM, Rubio W (2007) Improved positioning for side milling of ruled surfaces: analysis of the rotation axis’s influence on machining error. Int J Mach Tool Manu 47(6):934–945. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2006.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Marciniak K (1991) Geometric modelling for numerically controlled machining. Oxford University Press, OxfordMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Redonnet JM, Rubio W, Dessein G (1998) Side milling of ruled surfaces: optimum positioning of the milling cutter and calculation of interference. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 14(7):459–465. doi: 10.1007/BF01351391 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rubio DW, Lagarrigue P, Dessein G, Pastor F (1998) Calculation of tool paths for a torus mill on free-form surfaces on five-axis machines with detection and elimination of interference. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 14(1):13–20. doi: 10.1007/BF01179412 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Anderson C (1988) Curves and surfaces in computer aided geometric design, by F. Yamaguchi. Curves and surfaces in computer aided geometric design. Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Castillo R, Mendoza E, Comia J (2015) On minimum distance problem. Am Sci Res J Eng Technol Sci 11(1):84–95Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Manufacturing EngineeringTsinghua UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations