Regularized automatic frequency response function acquisition of a milling robot operating in a high-dimensional workspace
Source abstract
Abstract
Because robotic milling has become an important means for machining significant large parts, obtaining the structural frequency response function (FRF) of a milling robot is an important basis for machining process optimization. However, because of its articulated serial structure, a milling robot has an enormous number of operating postures, and its dynamics are affected by the motion state. To accurately obtain the FRF in the operating state of a milling robot, this paper proposes a method based on the structural modification concept. Unlike the traditional excitation method, the proposed method uses robot joint motion excitation instead of hammering excitation to realize automation. To address the problem of the lack of information brought by motion excitation, which leads to inaccurate FRF amplitudes, this paper derives the milling robot regularization theory based on the sensitivity of structural modification, establishes the modal regularization factor, and calibrates the FRF amplitude. Compared to the commonly used manual hammering experiments, the proposed method has high accuracy and reliability when the milling robot is in different postures. Because the measurement can be performed directly and automatically in the operation state, and the problem of inaccurate amplitudes is solved, the proposed method provides a basis for optimizing the machining posture of a milling robot and improving machining efficiency.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced machining processes and optimization · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Advanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. Tao B, Gong Z Y, Ding H. Robotic cluster machining: Manufacturing revolution for large and complex components. Sci China Tech Sci, 2022, 65: 2215–221710.1007/s11431-022-2106-2 ↗
2. Wang W, Guo Q, Yang Z, et al. A state-of-the-art review on robotic milling of complex parts with high efficiency and precision. Rob Comput Integr Manuf, 2023, 79: 10243610.1016/j.rcim.2022.102436 ↗
3. Zhang H, Wang J J, Zhang G, et al. Machining with flexible manipulator: Toward improving robotic machining performance. IEEE Asme Int C Adv, 2005, 1127–1132
4. Niu J, Xu J, Ren F, et al. A short review on milling dynamics in low-stiffness cutting conditions: Modeling and analysis. J Adv Manuf Sci Tech, 2021, 1: 2020004–0
5. Guo Y, Dong H, Wang G, et al. Vibration analysis and suppression in robotic boring process. Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 2016, 101: 102–11010.1016/j.ijmachtools.2015.11.011 ↗
6. Sun J, Zhang W, Dong X. Natural frequency prediction method for 6R machining industrial robot. Appl Sci, 2020, 10: 813810.3390/app10228138 ↗
7. Xin S, Peng F, Tang X, et al. Research on the influence of robot structural mode on regenerative chatter in milling and analysis of stability boundary improvement domain. Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 2022, 179: 10391810.1016/j.ijmachtools.2022.103918 ↗
8. Xin S, Tang X, Wu J, et al. Investigation of the low-frequency chatter in robotic milling. Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 2023, 190: 10404810.1016/j.ijmachtools.2023.104048 ↗
9. Ji W, Wang L. Industrial robotic machining: A review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 2019, 103: 1239–125510.1007/s00170-019-03403-z ↗
10. Ma S J, Xiao J L, Liu H T, et al. Modeling and analysis for time-varying dynamics of thin-walled workpieces in mirror milling considering material removal. Sci China Tech Sci, 2023, 66: 1883–189810.1007/s11431-022-2360-6 ↗
11. Celikag H, Ozturk E, Sims N D. Can mode coupling chatter happen in milling? Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 2021, 165: 10373810.1016/j.ijmachtools.2021.103738 ↗
12. Cui G, Li B, Tian W, et al. Dynamic modeling and vibration prediction of an industrial robot in manufacturing. Appl Math Model, 2022, 105: 114–13610.1016/j.apm.2021.12.031 ↗
13. Leonesio M, Villagrossi E, Beschi M, et al. Vibration analysis of robotic milling tasks. Proc CIRP, 2018, 67: 262–26710.1016/j.procir.2017.12.210 ↗
14. Nguyen V, Johnson J, Melkote S. Active vibration suppression in robotic milling using optimal control. Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 2020, 152: 10354110.1016/j.ijmachtools.2020.103541 ↗
15. Garnier S, Subrin K, Waiyagan K. Modelling of robotic drilling. Proc CIRP, 2017, 58: 416–42110.1016/j.procir.2017.03.246 ↗
16. Wu J, Peng F, Tang X, et al. Characterization of milling robot mode shape and analysis of the weak parts causing end vibration. Measurement, 2022, 203: 11193410.1016/j.measurement.2022.111934 ↗
17. Tunc L T, Shaw J. Experimental study on investigation of dynamics of hexapod robot for mobile machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 2016, 84: 817–830
18. Mohanty P, Rixen D J. Operational modal analysis in the presence of harmonic excitation. J Sound Vib, 2004, 270: 93–10910.1016/S0022-460X(03)00485-1 ↗
19. Maamar A, Gagnol V, Le T P, et al. Pose-dependent modal behavior of a milling robot in service. Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 2020, 107: 527–53310.1007/s00170-020-04974-y ↗
20. Vu V H, Liu Z, Thomas M, et al. Output-only identification of modal shape coupling in a flexible robot by vector autoregressive modeling. Mech Mach Theory, 2016, 97: 141–15410.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2015.11.005 ↗
21. Nguyen V, Melkote S. Hybrid statistical modelling of the frequency response function of industrial robots. Rob Comput Integr Manuf, 2021, 70: 10213410.1016/j.rcim.2021.102134 ↗
22. Zaghbani I, Songmene V. Estimation of machine-tool dynamic parameters during machining operation through operational modal analysis. Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 2009, 49: 947–95710.1016/j.ijmachtools.2009.06.010 ↗
23. Powałka B, Jemielniak K. Stability analysis in milling of flexible parts based on operational modal analysis. CIRP J Manuf Sci Tech, 2015, 9: 125–13510.1016/j.cirpj.2014.11.003 ↗
24. Nguyen V, Melkote S N. Identification of industrial robot frequency response function for robotic milling using operational modal analysis. Procedia Manuf, 2020, 48: 154–15810.1016/j.promfg.2020.05.032 ↗
25. Tian Y, Zhang J. Structural flexibility identification via moving-vehicle-induced time-varying modal parameters. J Sound Vib, 2020, 474: 11526410.1016/j.jsv.2020.115264 ↗
26. Malekjafarian A, OBrien E J. On the use of a passing vehicle for the estimation of bridge mode shapes. J Sound Vib, 2017, 397: 77–9110.1016/j.jsv.2017.02.051 ↗
27. Sung S H, Park J W, Moon Y J, et al. Estimation of structural static displacements based on vibration data using known mass perturbation. Smart Mater Struct, 2014, 23: 03700310.1088/0964-1726/23/3/037003 ↗
28. He W Y, Ren W X, Zuo X H. Mass-normalized mode shape identification method for bridge structures using parking vehicle-induced frequency change. Struct Control Health Monit, 2018, 25: e217410.1002/stc.2174 ↗
29. He Y, Yang J P, Yan Z. Estimating modal scale factors based on vehicle-induced variation of bridge frequencies. Eng Struct, 2023, 277: 11542410.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115424 ↗
30. Spong M W. Mathematical and computer modelling reports: Review article. Math Comput Model, 1989, 12: 91210.1016/0895-7177(89)90161-1 ↗
31. Tang X, Li Z, Yan R, et al. Operational impact excitation method for milling robot end frequency response function identification under movement state and pose-dependent dynamic compliance analysis. J Manuf Sci Eng, 2023, 145: 03450110.1115/1.4056300 ↗
32. Li B, Li L, He H, et al. Research on modal analysis method of CNC machine tool based on operational impact excitation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 2019, 103: 1155–117410.1007/s00170-019-03510-x ↗
33. Lee Y, Jeong S, Yoo H H. Modeling for transient and modal analysis of a flexible beam attached to a rigid shaft undergoing free rotational motion considering two-way inertia coupling. J Sound Vib, 2023, 543: 11736210.1016/j.jsv.2022.117362 ↗
34. Busch M, Schnoes F, Elsharkawy A, et al. Methodology for model-based uncertainty quantification of the vibrational properties of machining robots. Rob Comput Integr Manuf, 2022, 73: 10224310.1016/j.rcim.2021.102243 ↗
35. López-Aenlle M, Brincker R, Pelayo F, et al. On exact and approximated formulations for scaling-mode shapes in operational modal analysis by mass and stiffness change. J Sound Vib, 2012, 331: 622–63710.1016/j.jsv.2011.09.017 ↗
36. He W Y, Li J F, Cheng H C, et al. Flexibility matrix identification using the moving vehicle induced responses for beam type bridge. Eng Struct, 2022, 261: 11427710.1016/j.engstruct.2022.114277 ↗
37. Morlier J, Basile A, Chiplunkar A, et al. An EGO-like optimization framework for sensor placement optimization in modal analysis. Smart Mater Struct, 2018, 27: 07500410.1088/1361-665X/aac12b ↗
38. Mao X, Luo B, Li B, et al. An approach for measuring the FRF of machine tool structure without knowing any input force. Int J Mach Tools Manuf, 2014, 86: 62–6710.1016/j.ijmachtools.2014.07.004 ↗
39. Chen H, Ahmadi K. Estimating pose-dependent FRF in machining robots using multibody dynamics and Gaussian process regression. Rob Comput Integr Manuf, 2022, 77: 10235410.1016/j.rcim.2022.102354 ↗