Precision robotic deburring based on force control for arbitrarily shaped workpiece using CAD model matching



Surface finishing processes such as deburring are crucial for ensuring the quality of a workpiece and human safety by removing burrs. However, deburring involves excessive noise, dust, and vibration, which can be harmful to human workers. Thus, there has been extensive research into the use of robots to perform deburring instead of human workers. In robotic deburring, the precise tracking of the contour of an arbitrarily shaped workpiece is of major concern for precision deburring. In this study, to achieve precision deburring, a tool-path modification method based on a computer-aided design (CAD) model and direct teaching is proposed taking into consideration the position/orientation errors of the workpiece. In addition, based on this trajectory, impedance control is used to avoid applying an excessive contact force and a virtual wall is adopted to improve the force-control performance. Without knowing the position/orientation of the workpiece, the optimal deburring trajectory can be generated by matching the extracted tool path from the CAD model to the teaching points. From the simulations of the tool path modification method using an iterative closest point (ICP)-based contour matching algorithm and a series of experiments on robotic deburring, the performance of the proposed method was verified.


CAD model Direct teaching ICP matching algorithm Impedance control Robotic deburring 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Asakawa, N., Toda, K., and Takeuchi, Y., “Automation of Chamfering by an Industrial Robot; for the Case of Hole on Free-curved Surface,” Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 379–385, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shi, Y., Zheng, D., Hu, L., Wang, Y., and Wang, L., “NC Polishing of Aspheric Surfaces Under Control of Constant Pressure Using a Magnetorheological Torque Servo,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 58, No. 9–12, pp. 1061–1073, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kazerooni, H., “Automated Robotic Deburring Using Impedance Control,” IEEE Control System Magazine, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 21–25, 1988.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mohammad, M., Babriya, V., and Sobh, T., “Modeling a Deburring Process, Using DELMIA V5,” Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vol. 3, No. 11, pp. 835–847, 2008.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, S. C. and Tung, P. C., “Trajectory Planning for Automated Robotic Deburring on an Unknown Contour,” International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, Vol. 40, No. 7, pp. 957–978, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muto, S. and Shimokura, K., “Teaching and Control Robot Contour-Tracking Using Contact Point Detection,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 674–681, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Song, J. B., Kim, H. J., and Back, J. H., “Direct Teaching and Playback Algorithm for Peg-in-Hole Task using Impedance Control,” Institute of Control, Robotics and Systems, Vol. 15, No. 5, pp. 538–542, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jinho, M., Uenohara, M., Oaki, J., and Tatsuno, K., “Teaching-less Robot System for Finishing Workpieces of Various Shapes Using Force Control and Computer Vision,” Proc. of the 1999 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 573–578, 1999.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buckmaster, D. J., Newman, W. S., and Somes, S. D., “Compliant Motion Control for Robust Robotic Surface Finishing,” Proc. of the 7th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, Chongqing, pp. 559–564, 2008.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vafaeesefat, A., “NC machining of free-form Kriging surfaces,” Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf., Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 327–333, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liao, L., Xi, F., and Liu, K., “Modeling and Control of Automated Polishing/Deburring Process Using a Dual-purpose Compliant Toolhead,” International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, Vol. 48, No. 12–13, pp. 1454–1463, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bearee, R., Dieulot J. Y., and Rabate, P., “An Innovative Subdivision-ICP Registration Method for Tool-path Correction Applied to Deformed Aircraft Parts Machining,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 53, No. 5–8, pp. 463–471, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thomessen, T., Elle, O. J., Larsen, J. L., Anderson, T., Pedersen, J. E., and Lien, T. K., “Automatic Programming of Grinding Robot,” Modeling, Identification and Control, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 93–105, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim, B. S., Kim, Y. L., Song, J. B., and Son, S. W., “Impedance-Control Based Peg-in-Hole Assembly with a 6 DOF Manipulator,” KSME-A, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 347–352, 2011.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abbott, J. J., Marayong, P., and Okamura, A. M., “Haptic Virtual Fixtures for Robot-Assisted Manipulator,” Robotics Research, STAR, Vol. 28, pp. 49–64, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ziliani, G., Visioli, A., and Legnani, G., “A Mechatronic Approach for Robotic Deburring,” Mechatronics, Vol. 17, No. 8, pp. 431–441, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society for Precision Engineering and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations