Advertisement

Design, analysis, and implementation of a new adaptive chatter control system in internal turning

  • Mohsen Fallah
  • Behnam Moetakef-ImaniEmail author
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

In this article, the adaptive control of chatter vibrations in internal turning operations is addressed. The single-input and single-output (SISO) control system is composed of an electrodynamic shaker as the controllable actuator, an integrated electronics piezoelectric (IEPE) accelerometer as the feedback sensor, and a newly proposed control algorithm. A novel adaptive direct velocity feedback (DVF) controller is developed on the basis of the energy balance concept. The suggested gain adaptation algorithm dynamically adjusts the value of controller gain by considering the mutual interaction between the control system and the cutting process. The aim of the adaptive DVF controller is to maintain a reasonable balance between the rate of positive energy generated by the actuator and the rate of destructive energy absorbed by the boring bar due to chatter phenomenon, such that the stability of cutting process is remarkably improved with minimized actuation cost. The performance of the proposed adaptive chatter control system is experimentally verified during the internal turning of Aluminum alloy 6063-T6. The value of critical limiting depth of cut is anticipated to be nearly 0.2 mm for the slender boring bar. During the impact experiments, it has been observed that the adaptive DVF controller enhances the dynamic stiffness of boring bar by 11.4-fold. In addition, with the help of the presented adaptive controller, the stable cutting process is successfully performed with the maximum cutting depth of 2 mm. It has been observed that the amplitude of chatter vibrations is efficiently attenuated by at least 60 dB, adjacent to the dominant bending mode of the boring bar. The periodic chatter waviness is eliminated from surface texture and the roughness of cut surface is remarkably improved. Finally, it is proved that the presented control system can be effectively utilized in order to enhance the stability of active boring bar in deep internal turning operations.

Keywords

Active vibration control Chatter suppression Boring bar Stability improvement Adaptive controller 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project is financially supported by Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (research and technology grant ID: 3/40663).

References

  1. 1.
    Tlusty J (1981) Criteria for static and dynamic stiffness of structures. In Report of the Machine Tool Task Force, Vol. 3, Machine Tool Mechanics, Lawrence Livermore LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Munoa J, Beudaert X, Dombovari Z, Altintas Y, Budak E, Brecher C, Stepan G (2016) Chatter suppression techniques in metal cutting. CIRP Ann J Manuf Technol 65:785–808Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Suyama DI, Diniz AE, Pederiva R (2016) The use of carbide and particle-damped bars to increase tool overhang in the internal turning of hardened steel. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 86:2083–2092Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee DG, Hwang HY, Kim JK (2003) Design and manufacture of a carbon fiber epoxy rotating boring bar. J Compos Struct 60:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Song Q, Shi J, Liu Z, Wan Y, Xia F (2016) Boring bar with constrained layer damper for improving process stability. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 83:1951–1966Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rivin EI, Wu X (1987) An extra-long cantilever boring bar with enhanced chatter resistance. In: Proceedings of the 15th North American Manufacturing Research Conference. pp 447–452Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rivin EI (1986) Structural optimization of cantilever mechanical elements. Trans ASME J Vib Acoust Stress Reliab Des 108:427–443Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rivin EI, Kang H (1992) Enhancement of dynamic stability of cantilever tooling structures. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 32:539–561Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu X, Liu Q, Wu S, Liu L, Gao H (2017) Research on the performance of damping boring bar with a variable stiffness dynamic vibration absorber. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89:2893–2906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    New RW, Au YHJ (1980) Chatter-proof overhang boring bars—stability criteria and design procedure for a new type of damped boring bar. Trans ASME J Mech Des 102:611–618Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yoshimura M (1986) Vibration-proof design of boring bar with multidegree-of-freedom dampers. Trans ASME J Mech Transm Autom Des 108:442–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lawrance G, Paul PS, Varadarajan AS, Praveen AP, Vasanth XA (2017) Attenuation of vibration in boring tool using spring controlled impact damper. Int J Interact Des Manuf 11:903–915Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Matsubara A, Maeda M, Yamaji I (2014) Vibration suppression of boring bar by piezoelectric actuators and LR circuit. CIRP Ann J Manuf Technol 63:373–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang M, Fei R (2001) On-line chatter detection and control in boring based on an electrorheological fluid. J Mech 11:779–792Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mei D, Kong T, Shih AJ, Chen Z (2009) Magnetorheological fluid-controlled boring bar for chatter suppression. J Mater Process Technol 209:1861–1870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Akesson H, Smirnova T, Hakansson L (2009) Analysis of dynamic properties of boring bars concerning different clamping conditions. J Mech Syst Sign Process 23:2629–2647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fallah M, Moetakef-Imani B (2017) Analytical prediction of stability lobes for passively damped boring bars. J Mech 33:641–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang M, Zan T, Yang Y, Fei R (2010) Design and implementation of nonlinear TMD for chatter suppression: an application in turning processes. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50:474–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yang Y, Munoa J, Altintas Y (2010) Optimization of multiple tuned mass dampers to suppress machine tool chatter. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50:834–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yang Y, Dai W, Liu Q (2015) Design and implementation of two-degree-of-freedom tuned mass damper in milling vibration mitigation. J Sound Vib 335:78–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Venter GS, Silva LMP, Carneiro MB, da Silva MM (2017) Passive and active strategies using embedded piezoelectric layers to improve the stability limit in turning/boring operations. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89:2789–2801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Glaser DJ, Nachtigal CL (1979) Development of a hydraulic chambered actively controlled boring bar. Trans ASME J Eng Ind 101:362–368Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Akesson H, Smirnova T, Claesson I, Hakansson L (2007) On the development of a simple and robust active control system for boring bar vibration in industry. Int J Acoust Vib 12:139–152Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen F, Liu G (2017) Active damping of machine tool vibrations and cutting force measurement with a magnetic actuator. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89:691–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Abele E, Haydn M, Grosch T (2016) Adaptronic approach for modular long projecting boring tools. CIRP Ann J Manuf Technol 65:393–396Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Radecki PP, Farinholt KM, Park G, Bement MT (2010) Vibration suppression in cutting tools using a collocated piezoelectric sensor/actuator with an adaptive control algorithm. Trans ASME J Vib Acoust 132:051002–1 051002-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Katsuki A, Onikura H, Sajima T, Mohri A, Moriyama T, Hamano Y, Murakami H (2011) Development of a practical high-performance laser-guided deep-hole boring tool: improvement in guiding strategy. J Precis Eng 35:221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chiu WM, Lam FW, Gao D (2002) An overhung servo boring bar system for on-line correction of machining errors. J Mater Process Technol 122:286–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Andren L, Hakansson L (2004) Active vibration control of boring bar vibrations, research report, Department of Signal Processing, School of Engineering, Blekinge Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Min BK, O’Neal G, Koren Y, Pasek Z (2002) A smart boring tool for process control. J Mech 12:1097–1114Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chiu WM, Chanb KW (1997) Design and testing of piezoelectric actuator-controlled boring bar for active compensation of cutting force induced errors. Int J Prod Econ 51:135–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fallah M, Moetakef-Imani B (2019) Adaptive inverse control of chatter vibrations in internal turning operations. J Mech Syst Sign Process 129:99–111Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ganguli A, Deraemaeker A, Preumont A (2007) Regenerative chatter reduction by active damping control. J Sound Vib 300:847–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pratt J, Nayfeh AH (2001) Chatter control and stability analysis of a cantilever boring bar under regenerative cutting conditions. Philos Trans R Soc Math Phys Eng Sci 359:759–792CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Figliola RS, Beasley DE (2011) Theory and design for mechanical measurements, 5th edn. John Wiley and Sons, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Xue D, Chen YQ, Atherton DP (2007) Linear feedback control: analysis and design with MATLAB. SIAM, PhiladelphiaCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Altintas Y (2012) Manufacturing automation: metal cutting mechanics, machine tool vibrations, and CNC design, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Astrom KJ, Wittenmark B (1994) Adaptive control, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co, BostonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lang GF, Snyder D (2001) Understanding the physics of electrodynamic shaker performance. Sound Vib 35:24–33Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Madisetti VK (2009) The digital signal processing handbook: digital signal processing fundamentals, 2nd edn. CRC Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sortino M, Totis G, Prosperi F (2012) Development of a practical model for selection of stable tooling system configurations in internal turning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 61:58–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Campomanes ML, Altintas Y (2003) An improved time domain simulation for dynamic milling at small radial immersions. Trans ASME J Manuf Sci Eng 125:416–422Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Urbikain G, Olvera D, de Lacalle LNL, Elías-Zúñiga A (2015) Stability and vibrational behaviour in turning processes with low rotational speeds. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 80:871–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sims ND (2007) Vibration absorbers for chatter suppression: a new analytical tuning methodology. J Sound Vib 301:592–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringFerdowsi University of MashhadMashhadIran

Personalised recommendations