Mechanistic Approach for the Evaluation of Machine Tools Quasi-Static Capability

  • Károly SzipkaEmail author
  • Theodoros Laspas
  • Andreas Archenti
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering book series (LNME)


One of the greatest challenges in the manufacturing industry is to increase the understanding of the error sources and their effect on machine tool capability. This challenge is raised by the complexity of machining systems and the high requirements on accuracy. In this paper, a mechanistic evaluation approach is developed to handle the complexity and to describe the underlying mechanisms of the machine tools capability under quasi-static condition. The capability in this case is affected by the geometric errors of the multi-axis system and the quasi-static deflections due to process loads. In the assessment of these sources a mechanistic model is introduced. The model is composed of two parts, combining direct and indirect measurements. The direct measurement modelling method was applied to predict the effects of individual axis geometric errors on the functional point of machine tools. First, the direct measurement is employed to allow measuring each single machine tool axis motion error individually. The computational in the direct measurement model calculates the deviations from a given toolpath in the work space. Then, indirect measurements are used to determine the static stiffness and its variation in the workspace of machine tools. A case study demonstrates the applicability of the proposed approach, where laser interferometry was implemented as direct and loaded double ball bar as indirect measurement. The methodology was investigated on a three and a five axis machine tool and the results demonstrate the potential of the approach.


Accuracy Static stiffness Machine tool 



The authors wish to thank Dr Mikael Hendlind for research contribution on kinematic modelling and M.Sc. Jonny Gustafson for his contribution in the laser interferometer measurements. Centre for design and management of manufacturing systems (DMMS) at the Department of Production Engineering at KTH Royal Institute of Technology is acknowledged for financial support.


  1. 1.
    Archenti A, Nicolescu M, Casterman G, Hjelm S (2012) A new method for circular testing of machine tools under loaded condition, 5th CIRP Conference on High Performance Cutting, vol 1, pp 575–580Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Archenti A (2014) Prediction of machined part accuracy from machining system capability, CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 63: 505–508Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schwenke H, Knapp W, Haitjema H, Weckenmann A, Schmitt R, Delbressine F (2008) Geometric error measurement and compensation of machines—an update. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 57(2):660–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schellekens P, Vermeulen H, Vermeulen M, Wetzels S, Pril W (1993) Design for precision, current status and trends. Ann CIRP 42(2):557–586Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Donmez MA, Blomquist DS, Hocken RJ, Lui CR, Barash MM (1986) A general methodology for machine-tool accuracy enhancement by error compensation. Precision Eng J Am Soc Precision Eng 8(4):187–196Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    International Organization for Standardization, ISO 230, Test code for machine tools–part 1: geometric accuracy of machines operating under no-load or quasi-static conditions, 2012Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ibaraki S, Knapp W (2012) Indirect measurement of volumetric accuracy for three-axis and five-axis machine tools: a review. Int J Autom Technol 6(2):110–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    International Organization for Standardization, ISO 230-7, Test code for machine tools–part 7: geometric accuracy of axes of rotation, 2013Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferreira Placid M, Richard Liu C, University Purdue, Lafayette West (1991) An analytical quadratic model for the geometric error of a machine tool. J Manuf Syst 5(1):51–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Slocum AH (1992) Precision machine-design—macromachine design philosophy and its applicability to the design of micromachines. IEEE micro electro mechanical systems: an investigation of micro structures, sensors, actuators, machines and robots, pp 37-42Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Donmez MA (1986) A general methodology for machine-tool accuracy enhancement by error compensation. Precision Eng J Am Soc Precision Eng 8(4):187–196Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lin Y, Shen Y (2003) Modeling of five-axis machine tool metrology models using the matrix summation approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 21:243–248Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Soons JA, Theuws FC, Schellekens PH (1992) Modeling the errors of multi-axis machines: a general methodology. Precision Eng 14(1):5–19Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Suh S, Lee E, Jung S (1998) Error modeling and measurement for the rotary table of five-axis machine tools. J Adv Manuf Technol 14:63–656Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Károly Szipka
    • 1
    Email author
  • Theodoros Laspas
    • 1
  • Andreas Archenti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Production EngineeringKTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations