The modeling, analysis, and application of the in-process machining data for CNC machining

  • Huicheng Zhou
  • Minglang Lang
  • Pengcheng HuEmail author
  • Zhiwei Su
  • Jihong Chen


As the Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machining is executing, a large volume of in-process machining data is generated simultaneously in the CNC system, such as the interpolation point, actual feed rate, and tracking error. As a comprehensive reflection of entire CNC machining process, those types of data can be utilized to analyze the machining process and evaluate the machining results, especially in case of machining abnormalities, e.g., surface machining defects, excessive machining error, and malfunction of machine tool. In this paper, a novel idea called Chromatographic Point Cloud of Interpolation (CPCI) is defined by firstly building a point cloud from interpolation points and then assigning a color to each point according to a certain in-process machining data (e.g., feed rate). In order that the machining process can be effectively analyzed from the CPCI, a set of methods is proposed to efficiently triangulate the point cloud of the CPCI and quantify the continuity of in-process machining data of the CPCI. Experiments on two surfaces validate the effectiveness and advantage of the proposed triangular surface reconstruction method as well as its application in eliminating the surface defects resulting from the discontinuous feed rate between adjacent Cutter Location (CL) curves.


In-process machining data Interpolation point Point cloud compression Feed rate adjustment Surface machining defects 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant no. 51575210.


  1. 1.
    Yilbas Z, Hasmi MSJ (1999) Surface roughness measurement using an optical system. J Mater Process Technol 88:10–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Raju RU, Raju VR, Ramesh R (2017) Curvelet transform for estimation of machining performance. Optik-International Journal for Light and Electron Optics 131:615–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zawada-Tomkiewicz A (2010) Machined surface quality estimation based on wavelet packets parameters of the surface image, Pomiary Automatyka Kontrola 56:606–609Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liu J, Lu E, Yi H, Wang M, Ao P (2017) "A new surface roughness measurement method based on a color distribution statistical matrix," MeasurementGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jeyapoovan T, Murugan M (2013) Surface roughness classification using image processing. Measurement 46:2065–2072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zawada-Tomkiewicz A (2010) Estimation of surface roughness parameter based on machined surface image. Metrology and Measurement Systems 17:493–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alves ML, Clua E, Leta FR (2012) "Evaluation of surface roughness standards applying Haralick parameters and artificial neural networks," in International conference on systems, signals and image processing, pp. 452–455Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Samtaş G (2014) Measurement and evaluation of surface roughness based on optic system using image processing and artificial neural network. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 73:353–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Meireles JB, Silva LD, Caetano DP, Huguenin JAO (2012) Effect of metallic surface roughness on the speckle pattern formation at diffraction plane. Opt Lasers Eng 50:1731–1734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dhanasekar B, Mohan NK, Bhaduri B, Ramamoorthy B (2008) Evaluation of surface roughness based on monochromatic speckle correlation using image processing. Precis Eng 32:196–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fuh YK, Hsu KC, Fan JR (2012) Roughness measurement of metals using a modified binary speckle image and adaptive optics. Opt Lasers Eng 50:312–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu P, Zhang R, Tang K (2017) Automatic generation of five-Axis continuous inspection paths for free-form surfaces. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 14:83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hu P, Zhou H, Tang K, Lee C, Chen J, Yang J, Li L (2018) Spiral curve-based efficient five-axis sweep scanning of barrel-shaped surfaces. J Manuf Sci Eng 140:071001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hu P, Zhou H, Chen J, Lee C, Tang K, Yang J, Shen S (2018) Automatic generation of efficient and interference-free five-axis scanning path for free-form surface inspection. Comput Aided Des 98:24–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang Y, Zhou Z, Tang K (2018) Sweep scan path planning for five-axis inspection of free-form surfaces. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 49:335–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Erzurumlu T, Oktem H (2007) Comparison of response surface model with neural network in determining the surface quality of moulded parts. Mater Des 28:459–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Axinte D (2004) Process monitoring to assist the workpiece surface quality in machining. Int J Mach Tool Manu 44:1091–1108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fuht KH, Wu CF, Fuht KH, Wu CF (1995) A proposed statistical model for surface quality prediction in end-milling of A1 alloy. Int J Mach Tool Manu 35:1187–1200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lu C (2008) Study on prediction of surface quality in machining process. J Mater Process Technol 205:439–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rimpault X, Chatelain JF, Klemberg-Sapieha JE, Balazinski M (2016) "Tool wear and surface quality assessment of CFRP trimming using fractal analyses of the cutting force signals," Cirp Journal of Manufacturing Science & TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ko TJ, Kim HS, Park SH (2005) Machineability in NURBS interpolator considering constant material removal rate. Int J Mach Tool Manu 45:665–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lan TS, Wang MY (2009) Competitive parameter optimization of multi-quality CNC turning. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 41:820–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang X, Ding H (2013) Note on a novel method for machining parameters optimization in a chatter-free milling process. Int J Mach Tool Manu 72:11–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Luo M, Luo H, Axinte D, Liu D, Mei J, Liao Z (2018) A wireless instrumented milling cutter system with embedded PVDF sensors. Mech Syst Signal Process 110:556–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yeh SS, Tsai ZH, Hsu PL (2009) Applications of integrated motion controllers for precise CNC machines. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 44:906–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Guo J, Qiang Z, Gao XS (2013) Tracking error reduction in CNC machining by reshaping the kinematic trajectory. J Syst Sci Complex 26:817–835CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ramesh R, Mannan MA, Poo AN (2005) Tracking and contour error control in CNC servo systems. Int J Mach Tool Manu 45:301–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Xi XC, Zhao WS, Poo AN (2015) Improving CNC contouring accuracy by robust digital integral sliding mode control. Int J Mach Tool Manu 88:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liu GH, Wong YS, Zhang YF, Loh HT (2002) Adaptive fairing of digitized point data with discrete curvature. Comput Aided Des 34:309–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kwok TH, Tang K (2015) Improvements to the ICP algorithm for shape registration in manufacturing. J Manuf Sci Eng 138:011014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Besl PJ, McKay ND (1992) "Method for registration of 3-D shapes," in Sensor Fusion IV: Control Paradigms and Data Structures, pp. 586–607Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kwok TH "DNSS: dual-Normal-space sampling for 3-D ICP registration," IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng, vol. PP, pp. 1–12Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Remondino F (2003) "From point cloud to surface: the modeling and visualization problem," Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci, vol. 34Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lin H-W, Tai C-L, Wang G-J (2004) A mesh reconstruction algorithm driven by an intrinsic property of a point cloud. Comput Aided Des 36:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Remondino F, El-Hakim S (2006) Image-based 3D modelling: a review. Photogramm Rec 21:269–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical Science and EngineeringHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations