Industrial robots are garnering increased attention in the manufacturing sector, their application in high-precision tasks such as milling is however hindered by inherent limitations, notably low stiffness and instability. This study aims to investigate the influence of cutting parameters within segmented curve trajectories on surface quality during high-speed robotic milling process. The investigation covers surface morphology, the mechanism of burr formation, and the underlying causes of tool axial runout. The findings reveal that as spindle speed increases and feed speed decreases, the surface topography of the machined workpiece gradually improves and the quantity and dimensions of burrs on both sides of the slot have been decreased. Axial runout occurs during robotic milling due to insufficient robot stiffness, leading to vibrations that cannot effectively resist the reaction forces of cutting forces.
XuPGaoYYaoX, et al. Influence of process parameters and robot postures on surface quality in robotic machining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2023; 124(7–8): 2545–2561.
2.
LiMHuangDHanH, et al. Chatter detection and identification in high-efficient robotic milling CFRP composites using acoustic emission technique. Int J Precis Eng Manuf Green Technol2023; 10(5): 1155–1167.
3.
CvitanicTNguyenVMelkoteSN.Pose optimization in robotic machining using static and dynamic stiffness models. Rob Comput Integr Manuf2020; 66: 101992.
4.
LiMZhangXWangZ.Surface morphology improvement and residual stress distribution of SiCp/Al composites using high-power fiber laser-CNC milling cooperative machining strategy. J Manuf Processes2023; 108: 26–37.
5.
ChenCPengFYanR, et al. Stiffness performance index-based posture and feed orientation optimization in robotic milling process. Rob Comput Integr Manuf2019; 55: 29–40.
6.
NiknamSASongmeneV.Analysis of friction and burr formation in slot milling. Procedia CIRP2014; 17: 755–759.
7.
XueXZhangCChenQ, et al. The posture optimization method based on deformation index in robotic milling process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2022; 121(7–8): 4999–5014.
8.
YeCYangJZhaoH, et al. Task-dependent workpiece placement optimization for minimizing contour errors induced by the low posture-dependent stiffness of robotic milling. Int J Mech Sci2021; 205: 106601.
9.
LiMHuangDYangX.Chatter stability prediction and detection during high-speed robotic milling process based on acoustic emission technique. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2021; 117(5–6): 1589–1599.
10.
ZhuZTangXChenC, et al. High precision and efficiency robotic milling of complex parts: challenges, approaches and trends. Chin J Aeronaut2022; 35(2): 22–46.
11.
SunYLiuYZhengM, et al. A review on theories/methods to obtain surface topography and analysis of corresponding affecting factors in the milling process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2023; 127(2): 1–35.
12.
PingZXiujieYPenghaoW, et al. Surface integrity and tool wear mechanism of 7050-T7451 aluminum alloy under dry cutting. Vacuum2021; 184: 109886.
13.
NiJDaiRYueX, et al. Contribution ratio assessment of process parameters on robotic milling performance. Materials2022; 15(10): 3566.
14.
JinSYPramanikABasakAK, et al. Burr formation and its treatments-a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2020; 107: 2189–2210.
15.
WangWGuoQYangZ, et al. A state-of-the-art review on robotic milling of complex parts with high efficiency and precision. Rob Comput Integr Manuf2023; 79: 102436.
16.
LeeKHayasakaTShamotoE.Novel real-time monitoring method of depths of cut and runout for milling process utilizing FFT analysis of cutting torque. Precis Eng2023; 81: 36–49.
17.
ArizmendiMFernándezJGilA, et al. Model for the prediction of heterogeneity bands in the topography of surfaces machined by peripheral milling considering tool runout. Int J Mach Tools Manuf2010; 50(1): 51–64.
18.
ArizmendiMFernándezJGilA, et al. Effect of tool setting error on the topography of surfaces machined by peripheral milling. Int J Mach Tools Manuf2009; 49(1): 36–52.
19.
KongSYanYZhangL, et al. Cutter position optimization with tool runout for flank milling of non-developable ruled surfaces. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2021; 115(9–10): 2747–2763.
20.
ZhangXYuTZhaoJ.Surface generation modeling of micro milling process with stochastic tool wear. Precis Eng2020; 61: 170–181.
21.
LiZLZhuLM.Envelope surface modeling and tool path optimization for five-axis flank milling considering cutter runout. J Manuf Sci Eng2014; 136(4): 041021.
22.
FontaineMDevillezAMoufkiA, et al. Modelling of cutting forces in ball-end milling with tool–surface inclination: part II. Influence of cutting conditions, run-out, ploughing and inclination angle. J Mater Process Technol2007; 189(1–3): 85–96.
23.
ChenWLuLXieW, et al. A new surface topography-based method to quantify axial error of high speed milling cutters. J Manuf Sci Eng2018; 140(11): 111014.
24.
FrancoPEstremsMFauraF.Influence of radial and axial runouts on surface roughness in face milling with round insert cutting tools. Int J Mach Tools Manuf2004; 44(15): 1555–1565.
25.
ChenHQWangQH.Modelling and simulation of surface topography machined by peripheral milling considering tool radial runout and axial drift. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2019; 233(12): 2227–2240.
26.
LiMChenYTanM, et al. Surface integrity and acoustic emission characteristics during slot milling 3D carbon/carbon composites using superabrasive diamond grinding point. Diamond Relat Mater2023; 137: 110166.
27.
FontaineMMoufkiADevillezA, et al. Modelling of cutting forces in ball-end milling with tool-surface inclination: part I: predictive force model and experimental validation. J Mater Process Technol2007; 189(1–3): 73–84.
