Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Application of audible sound signals for tool wear monitoring using machine learning techniques in end milling

  • 436 Accesses

  • 10 Citations


Due to the demands of Computer-Integrated Manufacturing (CIM), the Tool Condition Monitoring (TCM) system, as a major component of CIM, is essential to improve the production quality, optimize the labor and maintenance costs, and minimize the manufacturing loses with the increase in productivity. To look for a reliable, efficient, and cost-effective solution, various monitoring systems employing different types of sensing techniques have been developed to detect the tool conditions as well as to monitor the abnormal cutting states. This paper explores the use of audible sound signals as sensing approach to detect the cutting tool wear and failure during end milling operation by using the Support Vector Machine (SVM) learning model as a decision-making algorithm. In this study, sound signals collected during the machining process are analyzed through frequency domain to extract signal features that correlate actual cutting phenomenon. The SVM method seeks to provide a linguistic model for tool wear estimation from the knowledge embedded in this machine learning approach. The performance evaluation results of the proposed algorithm have shown accurate predictions in detecting tool wear under various cutting conditions with rapid response rate, which provides the good solution for in-process TCM. In addition, the proposed monitoring system trained with sufficient signals collected from different positions has been proved to be position independent to monitor the tool wear conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    Čuš F, Župerl U (2011) Real-time cutting tool condition monitoring in milling. Strojniški vestnik - J Mech Eng 57(2):142–150. https://doi.org/10.5545/sv-jme.2010.079

  2. 2.

    Kurada S, Bradley C (1997) A machine vision system for tool wear assessment. Tribol Int 30(4):295–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-679X(96)00058-8

  3. 3.

    Rangwala S, Dornfeld D (1990) Sensor integration using neural networks for intelligent tool condition monitoring. J Eng Ind 112(3):219–228. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2899578

  4. 4.

    Byrne G, Dornfeld D, Inasaki I, Ketteler G, König W, Teti R (1995) Tool condition monitoring (TCM)—the status of research and industrial application. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 44(2):541–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60503-4

  5. 5.

    Wilcox SJ, Reuben RL, Souquet P (1997) The use of cutting force and acoustic emission signals for the monitoring of tool insert geometry during rough face milling. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 37(4):481–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(96)00069-7

  6. 6.

    Dong J, Subrahmanyam KVR, Wong YS, Hong GS, Mohanty AR (2006) Bayesian-inference-based neural networks for tool wear estimation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 30(9–10):797–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-005-0124-8

  7. 7.

    Jemielniak K, Kosmol J (1995) Tool and process monitoring-state of art and future prospects. Scientific papers of the institute of mechanical engineering and automation of the Technical University of Wroclaw 61:90–112

  8. 8.

    Jang DY, Choi YG, Kim HG, Hsiao A (1996) Study of the correlation between surface roughness and cutting vibrations to develop an on-line roughness measuring technique in hard turning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 36(4):453–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/0890-6955(95)00074-7

  9. 9.

    Chen JC, Huang LH, Lan AX, Lee S (1999) Analysis of an effective sensing location for an in-process surface recognition system in turning operations. J Ind Technol 15(3):1–6

  10. 10.

    Dey S, Stori JA (2005) A Bayesian network approach to root cause diagnosis of process variations. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(1):75–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.06.018

  11. 11.

    Chen JC, Chen WL (1999) A tool breakage detection system using an accelerometer sensor. J Intell Manuf 10(2):187–197. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008980821787

  12. 12.

    Dimla DE (2002) The correlation of vibration signal features to cutting tool wear in a metal turning operation. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 19(10):705–713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001700200080

  13. 13.

    Ertekin YM, Kwon Y, Tseng TLB (2003) Identification of common sensory features for the control of CNC milling operations under varying cutting conditions. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 43(9):897–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(03)00087-7

  14. 14.

    Bahr B, Motavalli S, Arfi T (1997) Sensor fusion for monitoring machine tool conditions. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 10(5):314–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/095119297131066

  15. 15.

    Stein JL, Wang CH (1990) Analysis of power monitoring on AC induction drive systems. J Dyn Syst Meas Control 112(2):239–248. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2896131

  16. 16.

    Jones J, Wu Y (1996) Cutting tool’s power consumption measured, US Patent. US 5–587-931

  17. 17.

    Zhou Y, Orban P, Nikumb S (1995) Sensors for intelligent machining-a research and application survey. In Systems, man and cybernetics, 1995. Intelligent systems for the 21st century. IEEE International Conference on (vol 2, pp 1005–1010). IEEE

  18. 18.

    Li X (2002) A brief review: acoustic emission method for tool wear monitoring during turning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 42(2):157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(01)00108-0

  19. 19.

    Belyi VA, Kholodilov OV, Sviridyonok AI (1981) Acoustic spectrometry as used for the evaluation of tribological systems. Wear 69(3):309–319

  20. 20.

    Ravindra HV, Srinivasa YG, Krishnamurthy R (1997) Acoustic emission for tool condition monitoring in metal cutting. Wear 212(1):78–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1648(97)00137-3

  21. 21.

    Iwata K, Moriwaki T (1977) An application of acoustic emission measurement to in-process sensing of tool wear. Ann CIRP 26(1):21–26

  22. 22.

    Weller EJ, Henry MS, Bjorn W (1969) What sound can be expected from a worn tool? J Eng Ind 91(3):525–534. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3591621

  23. 23.

    Delio T, Tlusty J, Smith S (1992) Use of audio signals for chatter detection and control. J Eng Ind 114(2):146–157

  24. 24.

    Alonso FJ, Salgado DR (2005) Application of singular spectrum analysis to tool wear detection using sound signals. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 219(9):703–710. https://doi.org/10.1243/095440505X32634

  25. 25.

    Raja E, Sayeed S, Samraj A, Kiong LC, Soong LW (2011) Tool flank wear condition monitoring during turning process by SVD analysis on emitted sound signal. Eur J Sci Res 49(4):503–509

  26. 26.

    Tangjitsitcharoen S, Rungruang C, Pongsathornwiwat N (2011) Advanced monitoring of tool wear and cutting states in CNC turning process by utilizing sensor fusion. Adv Mater Res 189:377–384 Trans tech publications

  27. 27.

    Sadat AB, Raman S (1987) Detection of tool flank wear using acoustic signature analysis. Wear 115(3):265–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(87)90216-X

  28. 28.

    Anderson DA, Dias WA (1988) Method for monitoring cutting tool wear during a machining operation. US Patent: 4,744,242

  29. 29.

    Wang J, Xie J, Zhao R, Zhang L, Duan L (2017) Multisensory fusion based virtual tool wear sensing for ubiquitous manufacturing. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 45:47–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2016.05.010

  30. 30.

    Hongjian X, Kechong Y, Rong Y (1997) The shape characteristic detection of tool breakage in milling operations. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 37(11):1651–1660. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(97)00021-7

  31. 31.

    Ramesh R, Mannan MA, Poo AN, Keerthi SS (2003) Thermal error measurement and modelling in machine tools. Part II. Hybrid Bayesian network—support vector machine model. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 43(4):405–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(02)00264-X

  32. 32.

    Sun J, Rahman M, Wong YS, Hong GS (2004) Multiclassification of tool wear with support vector machine by manufacturing loss consideration. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 44(11):1179–1187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.04.003

  33. 33.

    Sun J, Hong GS, Rahman M, Wong YS (2004) The application of nonstandard support vector machine in tool condition monitoring system. In Electronic Design, Test and Applications, Proceedings. DELTA 2004. Second IEEE International Workshop on (pp 295–300). IEEE

  34. 34.

    Vapnik V (1995) The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2440-0

  35. 35.

    Abellan-Nebot JV, Subirón FR (2010) A review of machining monitoring systems based on artificial intelligence process models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 47(1–4):237–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-009-2191-8

  36. 36.

    Ripley BD (2007) Pattern recognition and neural networks. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 354–354

  37. 37.

    Ting Ming K (2010) Confusion matrix. In: Claude S, Webb G (eds) Encyclopedia of Machine Learning. Springer US, pp 209–209

Download references


The authors gratefully acknowledge support from the Gleason Doctoral Fellowship program for this research, and would like to thank Ray Ptucha for his insightful suggestion into this work.

Author information

Correspondence to Rui Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kothuru, A., Nooka, S.P. & Liu, R. Application of audible sound signals for tool wear monitoring using machine learning techniques in end milling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 95, 3797–3808 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-1460-1

Download citation


  • Tool condition monitoring
  • Tool wear
  • Audible sound
  • Machine learning
  • Support vector machine