An Investigation on the Motion Error of Machine Tools’ Hexapod Table

  • Mohammad Reza Chalak Qazani
  • Siamak Pedrammehr
  • Mohammad Javad Nategh
Regular Paper
  • 13 Downloads

Abstract

Accuracy is greatly affected by the nonlinear motion of hexapods. This need is more apparent when these mechanisms are employed in machining industry where precision and surface qualities are of critical importance. In this paper, a comprehensive algorithm for tool path programming of the hexapod table is developed. This algorithm is developed based on a circular motion in C#.Net and has the capability of investigating nonlinear motion error to keep it in a controlled range as well. Improved Tustin algorithm is used for interpolating circular path. The effects of different parameters on the nonlinear error of machine tools’ hexapod table during circular interpolation are also investigated in this study. In the circular motion, the optimal radius which provides access to maximum feed rate with least error is obtained by solving Tustin and nonlinear error equations. The results obtained by the theoretical method are further verified through image processing experimental tests. It is found that the results of theoretical analysis and experimental test are in good consistency.

Keywords

Hexapod Circular interpolation Improved tustin algorithm Nonlinear error Image processing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhang, D., “Parallel Robotic Machine Tools,” Springer Science & Business Media, 2009.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chi, Z., Zhang, D., Xia, L., and Gao, Z., “Multi-Objective Optimization of Stiffness and Workspace for a Parallel Kinematic Machine,” International Journal of Mechanics and Materials in Design, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 281–293, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pedrammehr, S., Mahboubkhah, M., and Khani, N., “A Study on Vibration of Stewart Platform-Based Machine Tool Table,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 65, Nos. 5-8, pp. 991–1007, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pedrammehr, S., Mahboubkhah, M., Qazani, M. R. C., Rahmani, A., and Pakzad, S., “Forced Vibration Analysis of Milling Machine’s Hexapod Table under Machining Forces,” Strojniški vestnik-Journal of Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 158–171, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pedrammehr, S., Mahboubkhah, M., and Khani, N., “Natural Frequencies and Mode Shapes for Vibrations of Machine Tools’ Hexapod Table,” Proc. of 1st International Conference on Acoustics and Vibration ISAV 2011, pp. 21–22, 2011.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pedrammehr, S., “Investigation of Factors Influential on the Dynamic Features of Machine Tools’ Hexapod Table,” Proc. of 2nd International Conference on Acoustics and Vibration, 2012.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gao, Z. and Zhang, D., “Simulation Driven Performance Characterization of a Spatial Compliant Parallel Mechanism,” International Journal of Mechanics and Materials in Design, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 227–246, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jia, Z.-Y., Lin, S., and Liu, W., “Measurement Method of Six-Axis Load Sharing Based on the Stewart Platform,” Measurement, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 329–335, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rahmani, A., Ghanbari, A., and Pedrammehr, S., “Kinematic Analysis for Hybrid 2-(6-UPU) Manipulator by Wavelet Neural Network,” Advanced Materials Research, Vol. 1016, pp. 726–730, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dasgupta, B. and Mruthyunjaya, T., “Singularity-Free Path Planning for the Stewart Platform Manipulator,” Mechanism and Machine Theory, Vol. 33, No. 6, pp. 711–725, 1998.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shaw, D. and Chen, Y.-S., “Cutting Path Generation of the Stewart-Platform-Based Milling Machine Using an End-Mill,” International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 39, No. 7, pp. 1367–1383, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Merlet, J.-P., “A Generic Trajectory Verifier for the Motion Planning of Parallel Robots,” Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 123, No. 4, pp. 510–515, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pugazhenthi, S., Nagarajan, T., and Singaperumal, M., “Optimal Trajectory Planning for a Hexapod Machine Tool during Contour Machining,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, Vol. 216, No. 12, pp. 1247–1257, 2002.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wu, P. and Wu, C., “Motion Planning and Coupling Analysis Based on 3-RRR (4r) Parallel Mechanism,” International Journal of Mechanics and Materials in Design, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 325–331, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dash, A. K., Chen, I.-M., Yeo, S.H., and Yang, G., “Workspace Generation and Planning Singularity-Free Path for Parallel Manipulators,” Mechanism and Machine Theory, Vol. 40, No. 7, pp. 776–805, 2005.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Afroun, M., Chettibi, T., and Hanchi, S., “Planning Optimal Motions for a Delta Parallel Robot,” Proc. of 14th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation, pp. 1–6, 2006.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Afroun, M., Chettibi, T., Hanchi, S., Dequidt, A., and Vermeiren, L., “Optimal Motions Planning for a Gough Parallel Robot,” Proc. of 16th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation, pp. 493–498, 2008.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harib, K., Ullah, A. S., and Hammami, A., “A Hexapod-Based Machine Tool with Hybrid Structure: Kinematic Analysis and Trajectory Planning,” International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, Vol. 47, No. 9, pp. 1426–1432, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Li, Z., “Reconfiguration and Tool Path Planning of Hexapod Machine Tools,” Ph.D. Thesis, New Jersey Institute of Technology, 2000.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang, J., Wang, Z., Huang, T., and Whitehouse, D., “Nonlinearity for a Parallel Kinematic Machine Tool and Its Application to Interpolation Accuracy Analysis,” Science in China Series E: Technological Sciences, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 97–105, 2002.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zheng, K.-J., Gao, J.-S., and Zhao, Y.-S., “Path Control Algorithms of a Novel 5-DOF Parallel Machine Tool,” Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation, pp. 1381–1385, 2005.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pedrammehr, S., Qazani, M. R. C., Abdi, H., and Nahavandi, S., “Mathematical Modelling of Linear Motion Error for Hexarot Parallel Manipulators,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 942–954, 2016.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pedrammehr, S., Nahavandi, S., and Abdi, H., “Closed-Form Dynamics of Hexarot Parallel Manipulator by Means of the Principle of Virtual Work,” Acta Mechanica Sinica, 2018. (DOI: 10.1007/s10409-018-0761-4)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pedrammehr, S., Nahavandi, S., and Abdi, H., “Evaluation of Inverse Dynamics of Hexarot-based Centrifugal Simulators,” International Journal of Dynamics and Control, pp. 1–11, 2018. (DOI: 10.1007/ s40435-018-0421-3)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pedrammehr, S., Danaei, B., Abdi, H., Masouleh, M. T., and Nahavandi, S., “Dynamic Analysis of Hexarot: Axis-Symmetric Parallel Manipulator,” Robotica, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 225–240, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pedrammehr, S., Najdovski, Z., Abdi, H., and Nahavandi, S., “Design Methodology for a Hexarot-Based Centrifugal High-G Simulator,” IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, IEEE SMC 2017, 2017.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Qazani, M. R. C., Pedrammehr, S., and Nategh, M. J., “A Study on Motion of Machine Tools’ Hexapod Table on Freeform Surfaces with Circular Interpolation,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 75, Nos. 9-12, pp. 1763–1771, 2014.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Heisel, U. and Gringel, M., “Machine Tool Design Requirements for High-Speed Machining,” CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 389–392, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Harib, K. and Srinivasan, K., “Kinematic and Dynamic Analysis of Stewart Platform-Based Machine Tool Structures,” Robotica, Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 541–554, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li, Y.-J., Wang, G.-C., Zhang, J., and Jia, Z.-Y., “Dynamic Characteristics of Piezoelectric Six-Dimensional Heavy Force/ Moment Sensor for Large-Load Robotic Manipulator,” Measurement, Vol. 45, No. 5, pp. 1114–1125, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pedrammehr, S., Mahboubkhah, M., and Pakzad, S., “An Improved Solution to the Inverse Dynamics of the General Stewart Platform,” Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics (ICM), pp. 392–397, 2011.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pedrammehr, S., Mahboubkhah, M., and Khani, N., “Improved Dynamic Equations for the Generally Configured Stewart Platform Manipulator,” Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 711–721, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nanfara, F., Uccello, T., and Murphy, D., “The CNC Workbook,” An Introduction to Computer Numerical Control, 1995.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roy, R. K., “Design of Experiments Using the Taguchi Approach: 16 Steps to Product and Process Improvement,” John Wiley & Sons, 2001.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society for Precision Engineering and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Technology & Engineering, Department of Mechanical EngineeringTarbiat Modares UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Institute for Intelligent Systems Research and Innovation (IISRI)Deakin University, Waurn Ponds CampusVictoriaAustralia

Personalised recommendations