Research Papers

Modification of Tool Orientation and Position to Compensate Tool and Part Deflections in Five-Axis Ball End Milling Operations

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Habibi

Manufacturing Automation Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of British Columbia,
2054-6250 Applied Science,
Lane Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
e-mail: mohsen.habibi@ubc.ca

O. Tuysuz, Y. Altintas

Manufacturing Automation Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of British Columbia,
2054-6250 Applied Science,
Lane Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada

Manuscript received April 6, 2018; final manuscript received November 10, 2018; published online January 17, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Satish Bukkapatnam.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 141(3), 031004 (Jan 17, 2019) (9 pages) Paper No: MANU-18-1214; doi: 10.1115/1.4042019 History: Received April 06, 2018; Revised November 10, 2018

Tool-workpiece deflection is one of the major error sources in machining thin walled structures like blades. The traditional approach in industry to eliminate this error is based on modifying tool positions after measuring the error on the machined part. This paper presents an integrated model of cutting force distribution on the tool–blade contact, automatic update of blade static stiffness matrix without resorting to time-consuming finite element solutions as the material is removed, the prediction and compensation of static deflection marks left on the blade surface. The main focus of the paper is to compensate the deflection errors by respecting the maximum form errors, collision of tool/machine/workpiece, cutting speed limit at the tool tip, and ball end—blade surface contact constraints. The compensation has been carried out by two modules. The first module adjusts the tool orientation along the path to reduce the error by constructing an optimization problem. This module is computationally inexpensive and results in about 70% error reduction based on the conducted experiments. The modified tool path resulted from the first module is fed to the second module for further reduction of the form errors if needed at the violated cutter locations; hence it takes less computational time than the stand alone approach proposed in the literature. The proposed algorithms have been experimentally validated on five-axis finish ball end milling of blades with about 80% reduction in cutting force induced form errors.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Altintas, Y. , Kersting, P. , Biermann, D. , Budak, E. , Denkena, B. , and Lazoglu, I. , 2014, “Virtual Process Systems for Part Machining Operations,” CIRP Ann., 63(2), pp. 585–605. [CrossRef]
Suh, S. , Cho, J. , and Hascoet, J. , 1996, “Incorporation of Tool Deflection in Tool Path Computation: Simulation and Analysis,” J. Manuf. Syst., 15(3), pp. 190–199. [CrossRef]
Habibi, M. , Arezoo, B. , and Nojedeh, M. , 2011, “Tool Deflection and Geometrical Error Compensation by Tool Path Modification,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 51(6), pp. 439–449. [CrossRef]
Soori, M. , Arezoo, B. , and Habibi, M. , 2016, “Tool Deflection Error of Three-Axis Computer Numerical Control Milling Machines, Monitoring and Minimizing by a Virtual Machining System,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 138(8), p. 081005. [CrossRef]
Wan, M. , Zhang, W. H. , Qin, G. H. , and Wang, Z. P. , 2008, “Strategies for Error Prediction and Error Control in Peripheral Milling of Thin-Walled Workpiece,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 48(12–13), pp. 1366–1374. [CrossRef]
Chen, W. , Xue, J. , Tang, D. , Chen, H. , and Qu, S. , 2009, “Deformation Prediction and Error Compensation in Multilayer Milling Processes for Thin-Walled Parts,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 49(11), pp. 859–864. [CrossRef]
Ma, W. , He, G. , Zhu, L. , and Guo, L. , 2016, “Tool Deflection Error Compensation in Five-Axis Ball-End Milling of Sculptured Surface,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 84(5–8), pp. 1421–1430.
Wei, Z. C. , Wang, M. J. , Tang, W. C. , Zhu, J. N. , and Xia, G. C. , 2013, “Form Error Compensation in Ball-End Milling of Sculptured Surface With z-Level Contouring Tool Path,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 67(9–12), p. 2853. [CrossRef]
Bera, T. C. , Desai, K. A. , and Rao, P. V. M. , 2011, “Error Compensation in Flexible End Milling of Tubular Geometries,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 211(1), pp. 24–34. [CrossRef]
Ratchev, S. , Liu, S. , Huang, W. , and Becker, A. A. , 2006, “An Advanced FEA Based Force Induced Error Compensation Strategy in Milling,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 46(5), pp. 542–551. [CrossRef]
Altintas, Y. , Tuysuz, O. , Habibi, M. , and Li, Z. L. , 2018, “Virtual Compensation of Deflection Errors in Ball End Milling of Flexible Blades,” CIRP Ann., 67(1), pp. 365–368. [CrossRef]
Sun, C. , and Altintas, Y. , 2016, “Chatter Free Tool Orientations in 5-Axis Ball-End Milling,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 106, pp. 89–97. [CrossRef]
Ozturk, E. , Tunc, L. T. , and Budak, E. , 2009, “Investigation of Lead and Tilt Angle Effects in 5-Axis Ball-End Milling Processes,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 49(14), pp. 1053–1062. [CrossRef]
Layegh, S. , and Lazoglu, I. , 2017, “3D Surface Topography Analysis in 5-Axis Ball-End Milling,” CIRP Ann., 66(1), pp. 133–136. [CrossRef]
Layegh, S. , Yigit, I. , and Lazoglu, I. , 2015, “Analysis of Tool Orientation for 5-Axis Ball-End Milling of Flexible Parts,” CIRP Ann., 64(1), pp. 97–100. [CrossRef]
Tuysuz, O. , Altintas, Y. , and Feng, H.-Y. , 2013, “Prediction of Cutting Forces in Three and Five-Axis Ball-End Milling With Tool Indentation Effect,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 66, pp. 66–81. [CrossRef]
MACHPRO™, 2011, “Advanced Virtual Machining System,” Manufacturing Automation Laboratory, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Budak, E. , and Altintas, Y. , 1995, “Modeling and Avoidance of Static Form Errors in Peripheral Milling of Plates,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 35(3), pp. 459–476. [CrossRef]
Tuysuz, O. , and Altintas, Y. , 2018, “Time-Domain Modeling of Varying Dynamic Characteristics in Thin-Wall Machining Using Perturbation and Reduced-Order Substructuring Methods,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 140(1), p. 011015. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Flowchart of proposed compensation method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic view of ball end milling process: (a) deflected blade and cutter and (b) detailed view of the cutter and workpiece contact region

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Cutting force prediction at φ = φcc

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Illustration of the constraint implementation to prevent tool tip engagement with the workpiece

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Schematic view of the experiment: (a) six passes helically wrapped around the blade and (b) surface error versus design variables at i = 402

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Illustration of the experiment: (a) five-axis machining and (b) the machined part measurement by CMM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Tool orientation in (a) nominal path, (b) optimized path, and (c) tool axes map

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of the measured, predicted, and compensated surface error for six passes shown in Fig. 6, predicted: predicted surface error for nominal NC code, measured: measured surface error for nominal NC code, module I: measured surface error for the modified NC code using module I, module II: predicted surface error for the modified NC code using module II. The total computation time for modules I and II is ∼11 min and ∼45 min, respectively.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In