Fast Prediction of Static Form Errors in Peripheral Milling of Thin-Walled Workpieces Using Real Cutting Depth
Yonggang Kang,Zhongqi Wang,Jianjun Wu,Chengyu Jiang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-2758.2007.02.020
2007-01-01
Xibei Gongye Daxue Xuebao/Journal of Northwestern Polytechnical University
Abstract:Existing methods for predicting form errors[1-4] are, in our opinion, too tedious and time-consuming, leading to inefficiency in peripheral milling of thin-walled workpieces. We now present a fast and efficient method for making such prediction. In the full paper, we explain our fast and efficient method in detail; in this abstract, we just add some pertinent remarks to listing the two topics of explanation; (1) the analysis of milling process and the classification of forces and (2) the calculation of actual cutting depth of flexible cutting system; in topic 1, we utilize eqs. (1) through (4), taken from the open literature, to classify cutting forces into ten types, shown in Fig.3 in the full paper; the two subtopics of topic 2 are the determination of the maximum deflection of thin-wall under cutting (subtopic 2.1) and the calculation of actual cutting depth and maximum form errors (subtopic 2.2); in subtopic 2.1, we point out that δL(max), the maximum deflection, is either δW(max), the maximum deflection mainly caused by the decrease of rigidity of workpiece, or δC(max), the maximum deflection mainly caused by the deformation of cutter, whichever is bigger; in subtopic 2.2, based on the force indices extracted from the cutting force shape characteristics, we derive eqs. (6) though (11) in the full paper and eqs. (13) through (18) in the full paper for calculating actual cutting depth and maximum form errors. We performed tests, whose results are given in Fig. 10 in the full paper; these results show that deviations of calculated form errors from those measured are less than 16.2%. We also performed the comparison of speed of prediction of form errors of peripheral milling of thin-walled workpieces for our method with that for Tsai's method.[3] Using Pentium IV PC, we found that our fast and efficient method requires only 3 s as compared with 780 s required by Ref.3's method.