4.7 Article

Stiffness performance index based posture and feed orientation optimization in robotic milling process

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rcim.2018.07.003

关键词

Robotic milling; Performance index; Accuracy improvement; Posture optimization; Feed orientation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of Chinaunder [51625502]
  2. Innovative Group Project of Hubei Province [2017CFA003]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province of China [BK20161473]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Industrial robots are promising and competitive alternatives for performing machining operations. A relatively low stiffness is the major constraint for the widespread use of industrial robots in machining applications. In this study, the stiffness properties of an industrial robot are analyzed to improve the machining accuracy of robotic milling, and optimization methods for the robot posture and tool feed orientation are established. First, based on the relationship between the external force and deformation of the robot end effector (EE), the normal stiffness performance index (NSPI) of the surface, which is derived from the comprehensive stiffness performance index (CSPI), is proposed to evaluate the robot stiffness performance for a given posture. The NSPI is proven to be independent of the magnitudes of the external forces and dependent on the directions of these forces. A distribution rule is then proposed for the NSPI with respect to any direction in the Cartesian space for a given posture, which clearly reveals the anisotropic property of the robot stiffness. By maximizing the NSPI, an optimization model is established to optimize the posture of a six degree-of-freedom (DOF) industrial robot in a milling application. Using the NSPI, the optimized tool feed orientation for robot planar milling is obtained. Finally, the results of the robot milling experiments are discussed to illustrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed optimization methods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据