Advertisement

Application of audible sound signals for tool wear monitoring using machine learning techniques in end milling

  • Achyuth Kothuru
  • Sai Prasad Nooka
  • Rui Liu
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 203 Downloads

Abstract

Due to the demands of Computer-Integrated Manufacturing (CIM), the Tool Condition Monitoring (TCM) system, as a major component of CIM, is essential to improve the production quality, optimize the labor and maintenance costs, and minimize the manufacturing loses with the increase in productivity. To look for a reliable, efficient, and cost-effective solution, various monitoring systems employing different types of sensing techniques have been developed to detect the tool conditions as well as to monitor the abnormal cutting states. This paper explores the use of audible sound signals as sensing approach to detect the cutting tool wear and failure during end milling operation by using the Support Vector Machine (SVM) learning model as a decision-making algorithm. In this study, sound signals collected during the machining process are analyzed through frequency domain to extract signal features that correlate actual cutting phenomenon. The SVM method seeks to provide a linguistic model for tool wear estimation from the knowledge embedded in this machine learning approach. The performance evaluation results of the proposed algorithm have shown accurate predictions in detecting tool wear under various cutting conditions with rapid response rate, which provides the good solution for in-process TCM. In addition, the proposed monitoring system trained with sufficient signals collected from different positions has been proved to be position independent to monitor the tool wear conditions.

Keywords

Tool condition monitoring Tool wear Audible sound Machine learning Support vector machine 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge support from the Gleason Doctoral Fellowship program for this research, and would like to thank Ray Ptucha for his insightful suggestion into this work.

References

  1. 1.
    Čuš F, Župerl U (2011) Real-time cutting tool condition monitoring in milling. Strojniški vestnik - J Mech Eng 57(2):142–150.  https://doi.org/10.5545/sv-jme.2010.079 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kurada S, Bradley C (1997) A machine vision system for tool wear assessment. Tribol Int 30(4):295–304.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-679X(96)00058-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rangwala S, Dornfeld D (1990) Sensor integration using neural networks for intelligent tool condition monitoring. J Eng Ind 112(3):219–228.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2899578 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Byrne G, Dornfeld D, Inasaki I, Ketteler G, König W, Teti R (1995) Tool condition monitoring (TCM)—the status of research and industrial application. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 44(2):541–567.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60503-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilcox SJ, Reuben RL, Souquet P (1997) The use of cutting force and acoustic emission signals for the monitoring of tool insert geometry during rough face milling. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 37(4):481–494.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(96)00069-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dong J, Subrahmanyam KVR, Wong YS, Hong GS, Mohanty AR (2006) Bayesian-inference-based neural networks for tool wear estimation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 30(9–10):797–807.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-005-0124-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jemielniak K, Kosmol J (1995) Tool and process monitoring-state of art and future prospects. Scientific papers of the institute of mechanical engineering and automation of the Technical University of Wroclaw 61:90–112Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jang DY, Choi YG, Kim HG, Hsiao A (1996) Study of the correlation between surface roughness and cutting vibrations to develop an on-line roughness measuring technique in hard turning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 36(4):453–464.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0890-6955(95)00074-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen JC, Huang LH, Lan AX, Lee S (1999) Analysis of an effective sensing location for an in-process surface recognition system in turning operations. J Ind Technol 15(3):1–6Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dey S, Stori JA (2005) A Bayesian network approach to root cause diagnosis of process variations. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(1):75–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.06.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen JC, Chen WL (1999) A tool breakage detection system using an accelerometer sensor. J Intell Manuf 10(2):187–197.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008980821787 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dimla DE (2002) The correlation of vibration signal features to cutting tool wear in a metal turning operation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 19(10):705–713.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s001700200080 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ertekin YM, Kwon Y, Tseng TLB (2003) Identification of common sensory features for the control of CNC milling operations under varying cutting conditions. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 43(9):897–904.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(03)00087-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bahr B, Motavalli S, Arfi T (1997) Sensor fusion for monitoring machine tool conditions. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 10(5):314–323.  https://doi.org/10.1080/095119297131066 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stein JL, Wang CH (1990) Analysis of power monitoring on AC induction drive systems. J Dyn Syst Meas Control 112(2):239–248.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2896131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jones J, Wu Y (1996) Cutting tool’s power consumption measured, US Patent. US 5–587-931Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhou Y, Orban P, Nikumb S (1995) Sensors for intelligent machining-a research and application survey. In Systems, man and cybernetics, 1995. Intelligent systems for the 21st century. IEEE International Conference on (vol 2, pp 1005–1010). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li X (2002) A brief review: acoustic emission method for tool wear monitoring during turning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 42(2):157–165.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(01)00108-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Belyi VA, Kholodilov OV, Sviridyonok AI (1981) Acoustic spectrometry as used for the evaluation of tribological systems. Wear 69(3):309–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ravindra HV, Srinivasa YG, Krishnamurthy R (1997) Acoustic emission for tool condition monitoring in metal cutting. Wear 212(1):78–84.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1648(97)00137-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Iwata K, Moriwaki T (1977) An application of acoustic emission measurement to in-process sensing of tool wear. Ann CIRP 26(1):21–26Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weller EJ, Henry MS, Bjorn W (1969) What sound can be expected from a worn tool? J Eng Ind 91(3):525–534.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3591621 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Delio T, Tlusty J, Smith S (1992) Use of audio signals for chatter detection and control. J Eng Ind 114(2):146–157Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Alonso FJ, Salgado DR (2005) Application of singular spectrum analysis to tool wear detection using sound signals. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 219(9):703–710.  https://doi.org/10.1243/095440505X32634 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Raja E, Sayeed S, Samraj A, Kiong LC, Soong LW (2011) Tool flank wear condition monitoring during turning process by SVD analysis on emitted sound signal. Eur J Sci Res 49(4):503–509Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tangjitsitcharoen S, Rungruang C, Pongsathornwiwat N (2011) Advanced monitoring of tool wear and cutting states in CNC turning process by utilizing sensor fusion. Adv Mater Res 189:377–384 Trans tech publicationsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sadat AB, Raman S (1987) Detection of tool flank wear using acoustic signature analysis. Wear 115(3):265–272.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(87)90216-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Anderson DA, Dias WA (1988) Method for monitoring cutting tool wear during a machining operation. US Patent: 4,744,242Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang J, Xie J, Zhao R, Zhang L, Duan L (2017) Multisensory fusion based virtual tool wear sensing for ubiquitous manufacturing. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 45:47–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2016.05.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hongjian X, Kechong Y, Rong Y (1997) The shape characteristic detection of tool breakage in milling operations. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 37(11):1651–1660.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(97)00021-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ramesh R, Mannan MA, Poo AN, Keerthi SS (2003) Thermal error measurement and modelling in machine tools. Part II. Hybrid Bayesian network—support vector machine model. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 43(4):405–419.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(02)00264-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sun J, Rahman M, Wong YS, Hong GS (2004) Multiclassification of tool wear with support vector machine by manufacturing loss consideration. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 44(11):1179–1187.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.04.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sun J, Hong GS, Rahman M, Wong YS (2004) The application of nonstandard support vector machine in tool condition monitoring system. In Electronic Design, Test and Applications, Proceedings. DELTA 2004. Second IEEE International Workshop on (pp 295–300). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Vapnik V (1995) The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer, New York.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2440-0 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Abellan-Nebot JV, Subirón FR (2010) A review of machining monitoring systems based on artificial intelligence process models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 47(1–4):237–257.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-009-2191-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ripley BD (2007) Pattern recognition and neural networks. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 354–354Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ting Ming K (2010) Confusion matrix. In: Claude S, Webb G (eds) Encyclopedia of Machine Learning. Springer US, pp 209–209Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rochester Institute of TechnologyRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations