The present invention relates to presses, for example, presses for shaping metal or other materials. More particularly, the present invention relates to presses having operating characteristics that are easy to alter, for example, via programming.
Conventional metal forming presses can be divided into two categories: mechanical presses and hydraulic presses. The former is fast (high speed presses may reach up to several thousand shots per minute) and energy efficient (large flywheels can ease impulsive forces) but lacks flexibility. On the other hand, hydraulic presses are flexible (their motions can be programmed) and accurate, but are expensive to build and to operate (flywheels cannot be used and high powered hydraulic motors (e.g., linear actuators) are needed and hydraulic motors are slow). More recently, mechanical presses have been introduced that are driven by servomotors. Such presses can perform as flexibly as hydraulic presses with high speed. Nevertheless, they are extremely expensive to build and to operate (large expensive servomotors are needed and no flywheels or only relatively small flywheels are used).
Due to cost and productivity concerns, the mechanical presses are dominant in general factories. To achieve the desired performance, various designs for mechanical presses have been made mainly based on such philosophy as appending multiple linkages that apparently complicate the machines. Moreover, these designs are not controllable by re-programming or numerical control.
Generally, mechanical presses employ a conventional construction that includes a frame structure having a crown and a bed portion and which supports a slide in a manner enabling linear movement toward and away from the bed. A press drive assembly including a motor and a crankshaft is arranged to convert rotary-oscillatory motion into the rectilinear linear motion of the slide. These press machines are widely used for a variety of workpiece operations employing a large selection of die sets, with the press machine varying considerably in size and available tonnage depending on its intended use.
Conventional mechanical presses are provided a clutch which imparts rotational motion to a crankshaft. The crankshaft translates the rotational motion of the crankshaft into linear mechanical motion that is transmitted to the punch through a connecting arm. One complete rotation of the crankshaft produces one complete linear motion of the punch.
Depending upon the type of drive mechanism utilized, the punch can maintain a constant velocity or an irregular velocity. Irregular velocity is advantageous in press applications wherein reduction of the punch velocity near the bottom of the stroke is required so that the draw speed of the material is not exceeded. Presses which utilize different arrangements to produce irregular velocity are known in the art.
The ability to alter the drive mechanism of a mechanical press from a slider crank drive to differing link drive arrangements is advantageous in that one particular press may be altered to perform different operations. Modular unit presses can allow for differing drive mechanisms. Different modular units may be used to create different link drive arrangements and geometries. That is to say, link drive arrangements will be varied depending upon the modular unit chosen. The ability to vary the drive assembly of a press makes the press more versatile in its application. However, having to stop the press to make this reconfiguration is problematic.
What is needed are presses that are efficient and suitable for a variety of tasks.
According to an embodiment of the present invention, a press comprises: a first motor that produces mechanical movement; a second motor that produces mechanical movement; and a transmission configured to convey mechanical movement to a ram from mechanical movement received by the transmission from at least the first motor, the conveying being responsive to mechanical movement received by the transmission from the second motor; wherein the second motor is configured to provide mechanical movement that is controllably variable during a pressing cycle.
According to an embodiment of the present invention, there is a transmission for a mechanical press. The transmission comprises: a first transmission for receiving mechanical movement from a first motor and to transmit mechanical movement to a ram; and a second transmission for modifying configuration of the first transmission in response to mechanical movement received from a second motor wherein a profile of movement of the ram over a pressing cycle is affected by a profile of movement from the second motor over the pressing cycle.
According to an embodiment of the present invention, there is a method for performing a pressing operation. The method comprises the acts of: providing a first mechanical motion; conveying mechanical energy from at least the first mechanical motion to a ram via a transmission configuration; and providing a controllable second mechanical motion that alters the transmission configuration to control the motion characteristics of the ram, the second mechanical motion being distinct from the first mechanical motion.
According to an embodiment of the present invention, there is a method for constructing at least a portion of a mechanical press. The method comprises the acts of: providing a first transmission configured to receive mechanical movement from a first motor and to transmit mechanical movement to a ram; and providing a second transmission configured to modify configuration of the first transmission in response to mechanical movement received from a second motor wherein a profile of movement of the ram over a pressing cycle would be affected by a profile of movement from the second motor over the pressing cycle.
In order to more extensively describe some embodiment(s) of the present invention, reference is made to the accompanying drawings. These drawings are not to be considered limitations in the scope of the invention, but are merely illustrative.
The description above and below and the drawings of the present document refer to examples of embodiment(s) of the present invention and also describe some exemplary optional feature(s) and/or alternative embodiment(s). It will be understood that the embodiments referred to are for the purpose of illustration and are not intended to limit the invention specifically to those embodiments. For example, although embodiments of the present invention are discussed using examples involving particular numbers of linkages, the invention is not to be limited to those embodiments or to any particular fixed number of linkages. Rather, the invention is intended to cover all that is included within the spirit and scope of the invention, including alternatives, variations, modifications, equivalents, and the like.
Conventional stamping mechanisms are based on planar linkage mechanisms with one degree-of-freedom. Given a particular conventional stamping mechanism operating on a particular workpiece, the motion profile of the ram 14 (e.g., the position and/or speed as a function of time) for a stamping operation can be controlled only by controlling the output of the driving motor 12. Conceptually, the motion profile can be considered to be a fixed function of only one possibly-controllable parameter, namely, the output of the driving motor 12. It is known that the particular motion profile to be realized by a mechanical press can be fine-tuned ahead of time by appropriately designing an appropriate configuration of multiple linkages into the conventional transmission 16. Such tuning leads to more and more complicated configurations and higher and higher production and maintenance costs. Further, the lack of programmable flexibility still remains unless an extremely expensive powerful servomotor and a strong controller are used (and then only with a relatively small flywheel or no flywheel).
Recall from discussion of
For example, the first motor 32 may be embodied as a conventional common motor that has a fixed output (e.g., constant speed), and the multiple-input transmission 36 may be configured to respond to changes in the output of the second motor 34 by causing changes in the motion profile of the ram 38. In some embodiments of this example, the multi-input transmission 36 may be conceptually viewed as an otherwise conventional transmission that is primarily driven by the first motor 32. Accordingly, in this conceptual view, the multi-input transmission 36 realizes a function of the ram 38's motion profile as a function primarily of the output of the first motor 32. However, the multi-input transmission 36 is NOT actually conventional because its geometry can be dynamically changed by the second motor 34. Thus, even if the first motor 32 has fixed output, because the geometry of the transmission that the first motor 32 “sees” can be changed, therefore the motion profile (including position and speed and acceleration) of the ram 38 can be controlled by controlling the output the second motor 34. Such a configuration is efficient because the first motor 32 can efficiently run at constant speed, using an efficiently large flywheel, while the second motor 34 can be weaker (even much weaker) than the first motor 32 and does not have to fight the full momentum of the flywheel.
For example, the first motor 32 may be a large high-power common motor that provides a majority of the punching energy, and the second motor 34 may be a much smaller servomotor that can dynamically and programmatically fine-tune the motion profile of the ram 38. By re-programming the motion of the servomotor (34), the ram motion can be modified to have a desired performance or for desired stamping operations. In one embodiment, the common motor (32) is high powered and is expected to contribute a large part of the total energy dissipation, and the servomotor is low powered and is expected to be allocated a slim part of the total energy dissipation, according to the particular design chosen by the system designer.
The press 30a, minus the second motor 34a, its crank 50, the linkage 56 and the rotary joint 66, can be considered to be similar to a conventional press configuration with a simple, fixed drivetrain geometry. The second motor 34a, its crank 50, the linkage 56 and the rotary joint 66 effectively make the drivetrain of the press 30a have a programmably and dynamically variable geometry. With such a configuration, a great variety of motion profiles of the ram 38a can be obtained even if the first motor 32a merely turns at constant speed. During a single punch, while the first motor 32a turns the crank 48 at constant speed, the second motor 34a can turn its crank in arbitrary or jerky manner according to a program of operation, in order to produce the desired motion profile at the ram 38a. The second motor 34a can change the the geometry of the transmission that the first motor 32a “sees”, and the second motor 34a can sometimes also contribute some driving power to the ram 38a, according to its program. The transmission can be, and preferably is, configured such that the linkages are properly dimensioned according to geometric principles to permit the motors 32a and 34a to move freely. (Note that, for ease of viewing,
Example Details
In the remainder of the present document, discussion and analysis will primarily be of the embodiment of the present invention that is shown in
The working principle of the new machine is rather straightforward: taking away the controllable part of the mechanism (i.e., Bars 50 and 56), the machine is simply a five-bar slide-crank mechanism. The controllable part can be considered as an add-on component that fine-tunes the motion of the ram (including its displacement and velocity).
Feasibility Conditions
It is preferable to have the new machine move freely. To achieve this, a couple of feasibility conditions are used. These include the assembly condition and the double crank condition. Following the feasibility conditions, the reachable range of the ram can be derived. For convenience, the feasibility conditions are provided for the embodiment of
The assembly condition is as follows. From a mechanism point of view, as shown in
2max(r1,r2,r4,r5, d)<r1+r2+r4+r5+d (1)
where, d={square root}{square root over (d12+d22)} is the distance between O1 and O2. On the other hand, the second part should be able to connect the first part at the Joint B without interference. This converts to the assembly constraint expressed below:
r3≧max(dist) (2)
where, dist is the distance between Joint B and the central line of the ram guidance track.
The double-crank condition is as follows. In order for the machine to move freely, both bars 48 and 50 must be cranks. The double-crank condition consists of two parts. The first part can be expressed as:
|r2−r4|<r1+r5+d<r2+r4 (3.a)
The second part takes one of the following:
|r2−r4|<r1−r5−d<r2+r4
|r2−r4|<r5+d−r1<r2+r4
|r2−r4|<d−r1−r5<r2+r4
|r2−r4|<r1+r5−d<r2+r4
|r2−r4|<r5−r1−d<r2+r4
|r2−r4|<r1+d−r5<r2+r4 (3.b)
When the double crank condition is satisfied, the motions of the two cranks are unconstrained. In other words, one can rotate freely regardless where the other one goes, and vice versa.
Under the aforementioned conditions, the reachable range of the ram can be found. Note that the ram moves along the guidance track and the reachable range of the ram will be the controllable length of the ram's stroke. As shown in
Kinematical Model
To derive the kinematical model of the machine, the Assur's Group method is used. Its basic idea is divide-and-conquer. First, the machine is divided into four groups: Group 1 consists of the anvil of the machine and Link O1A, Group 2 consists of the anvil of the machine and Link O2C, Group 3 is made of Link AB and Link CB, and Group 4 is made of Link BD and the punch. Next, the kinematical model for each group is derived. Finally, by combining them all together, the kinematical model of the machine is found.
(a) Group 1: From
where, θ1 is the angular position of the CSM. By differentiation, the velocity can be found as follows:
where, {dot over (θ)}1 is the velocity of the CSM and it is constant. Hence, the acceleration is:
(b) Group 2: Similar to Group 1, the position, velocity and acceleration of the hinge point C are as follows:
where, θ2, {dot over (θ)}2, {umlaut over (θ)}2 are respectively the angular position, velocity and acceleration of the VSM.
(b) Group 3: The hinge point B is the critical point of the machine. From
where, φ1 is the angle between the link AB and the positive x axis and it is defined below:
where, K=2r2(y2−y1), L=2r2(x2−xi), and M=r22+(x2−x1)2+(y2−y1)2−r42. By means of derivative, the velocity can be found as follows:
Here, φ2 is the angle between Link CB and the positive x axis as defined below:
Furthermore, the acceleration is:
(d) Group 4: This RRP group describes the motion of the punch (i.e., the ram). Following the configuration in
s=s′−s′min (13)
where, s′min=min(s′), and s′=yB−{square root}{square root over (r32−(e−xB)2)}. In addition, the velocity of the punch is:
Finally, the acceleration of the punch is:
Equations (13)-(15) define the displacement, velocity and acceleration of the punch. They are dependent on the angular speeds of the CSM and the VSM.
Mechanical Advantage, Torque And Power
The new machine has two distinct advantages. First, it is flexible, which has been shown above. Second, it is energy efficient. This is achieved by distributing the majority of the energy to the CSM, which carries a flywheel to ease the large impulsive metal forming force. The VSM, on the other hand, controls the motion, velocity and acceleration of the press but takes only a small load. This can be appreciated by studying the mechanical advantage, torque distribution and power distribution.
(a) Mechanical Advantage with Respect to the CSM: According to the static mechanics, the mechanical advantage of the machine with respect to the CSM (i.e. the proportion of the force F of the machine over the moment M1 of the CSM), can be derived as shown below:
where, γ1 is the angle between Link BC and Link BA, γ2 is the angle between Link BD and Link BC, γ3 is the angle between Link AB and Link AO1, and γ4 is the angle between Link DB and the guidance of the ram. Note that they are all known since the instantaneous positions of the links can be found as shown in Section 2.3.
(b) Mechanical Advantage with Respect to the VSM: The mechanical advantage with respect to the VSM is:
where, γ5 is the angle between the link BA and the link BD, γ6 the one between the link CO2 and Link CB counterclockwise. They are both known.
(c) Mechanical Advantage of Hybrid Press: Integrating the equations (16) and (17) listed above, we can get the mechanical advantage for the hybrid press represented as
From Equation (18), it is seen the mechanical advantage of the machine is a function of its structure parameters as well as the angular positions of the motors.
(d) Moment Distribution for CSM: Based on Equation (16), the moment requirement of the CSM can be found:
(e) Moment Distribution for VSM: From Equation (17), the moment requirement of the VSM is as follows:
Neglecting the influences of the friction, damping, et a.l, it is seen that the moments of both the CSM and VSM are functions of the workload, the structures, and the angular positions of the motors.
(f) Power Distribution for CSM: The power distributed to the CSM is represented as follows:
(g) Power Distribution for VSM: The power distributed to the VSM is expressed by
(h) Discussion: Going through Equations (16)˜(20), it can be seen that the machine will lose payload capacity momentarily when γ1=0, π (where Link 52 and Link 56 are in line), or γ4=π/2 (where Link 54 is perpendicular to the guidance of the ram). This means no force could be generated despite of large moment given by both motors. Fortunately, these cases would not happen for the unconstrained double-crank press. On the other hand, it is interesting to see that the machine can produce a large payload without the CSM moment input when γ2=0 or π (where, Link BD and Link CB are collinear), and/or γ3=0, π (where Link 48 and Link 52 are in line). Similarly, it can do the same without the VSM moment input when γ5=0, π (where Link 54 and Link 52 are collinear) and/or γ6=0, π (where Link 50 and Link 56 are in line). Of course, these would not happen in practice because of the friction and damping.
In addition, according to Equations (19) to (22), the moment and the power required from the VSM and the CSM would be lower when γ1 is near π/2 or 3π/2 (i.e., Link 56 is perpendicular to Link 52) and/or γ4 is near 0 or π (i.e., Link 54 is parallel to the ram guidance). Besides, according to Equation (22), the power required from the VSM also depends on the ratio of the VSM's angular speed and the CSM's angular speed (i.e., dθ2/dθ1). This involves the trajectory planning, which will be discussed further below.
In summary, to improve the energy efficiency, following conditions should be kept: (1) Link 54 and Link 52 are nearly collinear, (2) Link 56 and Link 52 are almost orthogonal, and (3) Link 54 is closely collinear with the ram.
Computer Simulations
Based on the model presented above, and on models that can similarly be adopted for other particular embodiments or geometries, computer simulations can be carried out to demonstrate that the performance of the new machine can be programmed. As an example, simulations were run for three example cases (“Case 1”, “Case 2”, and “Case 3”).
Design Optimization
From the simulation results presented in the previous section, it is seen that the structure parameters have a significant influence on the performance of the machine. Computer optimization of the structure parameters can be performed using any suitable optimization technique, according to the particular needs and goals of the system designer.
An Example Optimization Model
The optimization parameters can be denoted as a vector:
X=(r1,r2,r3, r4,r5,d1,d2,e) (23)
The objective function is defined as follows:
F={overscore (ω)}1 max(M1)+{overscore (ω)}2 max(M2)+{overscore (ω)}3(1/Φ)+{overscore (ω)}4(1/min(SA)) (24)
where, {overscore (ω)}1, {overscore (ω)}2, {overscore (ω)}3, and {overscore (ω)}4 are weighting factors. Note that the weighting factors have physical meanings. For example, it is desirable to have {overscore (ω)}1<<{overscore (ω)}2 (i.e., the moment of the CSM shall be much bigger than that of the VSM). Also, Φ is the maximal rotational angle of the CSM when the ram is close to the BDC (see
The Genetic Algorithm (GA) may be used for optimization. Example optimizations were carried out under two different goals. The first one is to minimize the moments of the CSM and the VSM without considering the dwelling angle (i.e., {overscore (ω)}3=0) and the ram travel range (i.e., {overscore (ω)}4=0). The second one is to minimize the moments of the motors and the dwelling angle as well as the ram travel range.
Discussion
It is seen that the new machine can be easily and dynamically adjusted to form different strokes (i.e., different motion profiles) without reassembly of the machine. In other words, it can behave like a hydraulic press or a servomotor driven press, though it is much cheaper to make. Compared with the hydraulic presses or servomotor driven presses, the new machine is very efficient in terms of energy usage. One reason is that it can use a large constant speed motor with a large flywheel to produce majority of the force, and at the same time use a small servomotor to tune the performance. The design can be optimized to provide performance balancing the kinematical flexibility and the energy consumption.
The Inverse Kinematics Model
In practice, user may want to specify a desirable trajectory (or at least several crucial points on the trajectory). The inverse kinematics is needed to determine the corresponding angular motions of the two motors based on the desirable trajectory. This kinematics problem can be solved in the fashion of the robot inverse kinematics problem: given a trajectory in the workspace, determine the motions of the joints in the joint space.
For our new machine, the joint space parameters include (a) the angular parameters of the CSM including θ10 (initial angular position), θ1 (angular displacement), {dot over (θ)}1 (angular speed) and {umlaut over (θ)}1 (angular acceleration); (b) the angular parameters of the VSM including θ20 (initial angular position), θ2 (angular displacement), {dot over (θ)}2 (angular speed) and {umlaut over (θ)}2 (angular acceleration). On the other hand, the work space parameters include s (ram travel), {dot over (s)} (ram speed) and {umlaut over (s)} (ram acceleration). The inverse kinematics model can be derived based on the kinematics model. As shown above, the kinematics of the model can be described by the vector equations below:
where, d=d1+d2. Equation (B1) can be decomposed into a set of scale equations as follows
where, β1 is the angle between Link AB and positive x axis, β2 is the angle between Link CB and positive x axis, and β3 is the angle between Link BD and positive x axis, all in counterclockwise. In addition, s′=(s+s′min), where s′min=min(s′). From Equation (B2), the inverse angular positions can be derived as follows:
Note that the solution is not unique.
Differentiating Equation (B2) with respect to time, t, and then using Cramer Rule, the inverse angular velocities can be found as follows
Furthermore, double differentiating Equation (B2) and using Cramer Rule again, the inverse angular accelerations can be found as follows
The Effect of the Initial Angular Positions of the Motors
Unlike the robot inverse kinematics problem, the initial positions of the two motors play an important role. As pointed out above, the CSM rotates continuously at a constant speed. And the speed of the VSM varies to accommodate the required trajectory needs. From a mechanical point of view, as shown in
Trajectory Planning and Optimization
Any competent trajectory planning (and any optimization) technique can be used. The objective of trajectory planning is to determine the motion of the VSM such that the ram travel fulfills the user's requirements. In practice, the user usually gives a vague definition of the desirable travel, such as (a) smooth pressing to avoid large transient force and vibration, (b) long dwelling time to ensure complete metal deformation, and (c) slow releasing to minimize workpiece spring-back. These requirements can be represented by a number of critical points, also called via points. The trajectory is to pass through these via points. In practice, more via points and dwelling segments may be added.
One procedure for trajectory planning and optimization is as follows:
Step 1: Compute the corresponding points in the joint space with position, velocity and/or acceleration based on the inverse kinematics described above;
Step 2: Determine the trajectories segment by segment in the joint space by polynomial interpolation and optimization; and
Step 3: Combine the joint trajectory segments to form the entire trajectory.
Optimization
As shown in an earlier section above, the majority of the power is distributed to the CSM. Furthermore, the power consumption of the CSM is independent on the ratio of the VSM speed and the CSM speed. On the contrary, the power consumption of the VSM is changing with respect to that ratio and hence, could be minimized. In other words, it is possible to design a path to lower the energy consumption of the VSM. To do this, an optimization procedure is carried out. The goal of the optimization is to minimize the energy of the VSM as defined below:
Note that γ1 is the angle between Link BC and Link BA, γ4 is the angle between Link DB and the anvil of the press, γ5 is the angle between Link BA and Link BD, and γ6 is the angle between Link CO2 and Link CB, all defined in counterclockwise. For simplicity, Equation (B15) can be approximated by the discrete form below:
where, n is the number of discrete points along the path. This objective function can also be replaced by other criteria, such as the peak power of the VSM.
The trajectory optimization problem, such as the one above, is a highly nonlinear optimization problem. According to literature, it has been studied in a number of articles. The Genetic Algorithm (GA) may be used.
Sensitivity Analysis and Error Compensation
In practice, there may be many errors, such as dimension error, assembly error and motor/belt backlash, that may cause the deterioration of the machine performance. Based on mathematical models, the possible errors of the machine include the machine structure errors: Δr1, Δr2, Δr3, Δr4 and Δr5 (corresponding to r1, r2, r3, r4 and r5 respectively); the assembly errors Δd1, Δd2 and Δe (corresponding to d1, d2 and e respectively); as well as the motor motion errors Δθ1 and Δθ2 (corresponding to θ1 and θ2). These errors can affect the ram travel and can be compensated for.
Sensitivity Analysis
According to the tolerancing theory, the partial derivative of the travel with respect to a parameter can be used to evaluate the sensitivity of that parameter. Thus, the sensitivities of the aforementioned errors are as follows:
s′r
s′d
s′e=∂s/∂e′ (B19)
s′θ
With tedious but straightforward calculus manipulation, the solutions of s′r
In general, the aforementioned errors can be grouped into two types: time-independent errors and time-dependent errors. The former includes the structural errors (Δr1, Δr2, Δr3, Δr4 and Δr5) and assembly errors (d1, d2 and e). When the machine is made, these errors are fixed and hence, are time-independent. On the other hand, the motor rotation errors (Δθ1 and Δθ2) are dependent on the motion and hence, are time-dependent. Different methods may be used to compensate for these two types of errors.
Compensating the Time Independent Errors by Trajectory Planning
Without losing generality, let R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5 as well as D1, D2 and E be the actual dimensions of the machine, then
Ri=ri+Δri, i=1˜5 (B21)
Di=di+Δdi, i=1, 2 (B22)
E=e+Δe (B23)
Suppose that the errors can be measured (or equivalently, the actual dimension of the machine can be measured precisely), then it is possible to compensate them by means of trajectory planning. This is done by simply using the actual parameters, Ri, i=1˜5, Di, i=1, 2, and E replacing the design parameters, ri, i=1˜5, Di, i=1, 2, and e in trajectory planning and optimization. It is interesting to know that such a compensation cannot be done in conventional 1-DOF stamping press. This is another advantage of our new machine.
Compensating Motor Rotation Errors by Feedback Control
The time-dependent error Δθ1 and Δθ2 can be compensated by means of feedback control. In practice, the CSM rotates at a constant speed and hence, is uncontrollable. Nevertheless, through an encoder its error, Δθ1, can be measured. On the other hand, the VSM is a servomotor and its rotation is measurable and controllable. Therefore, the speed of the VSM can be regulated to compensate for the time-dependent motor rotation error in real time.
Other embodiments of the present invention are apparatuses or articles produced according to any method embodiment of the present invention or produced by any apparatus embodiment of the present invention. For example, any metal or other article (e.g., automobile parts, appliance parts, container parts, and the like) produced by a method or apparatus embodiment of the present invention.)
An embodiment of the present invention relates to a programmable numerical control mechanical press, which best appeals to the trend of manufacturing philosophy shifting from rigid automation to flexible automation with low cost.
An embodiment of the present invention is directed to developing a new family of mechanical presses wherein it is desired to accommodate different stamping operations by re-programming without any disassembly.
An embodiment of the present invention provides a programmable punching mechanism for a mechanical press which includes the ability to vary the stroke and travel by re-programming without disassembly of the press.
An embodiment of the invention comprises a mechanical press containing a two degree-of-freedom planar parallel punching mechanism. One portion of the mechanism comprises a closed-chain planar five-bar linkage. The other portion of the mechanism comprises a zero degree-of-freedom slide-link group. The two portions form a seven-bar punching mechanism.
An embodiment of the invention comprises a mechanical press containing two different driving motors. One motor is an arbitrary kind of common motor, or un-adjustable constant speed motor with a large power, whose motion is un-controllable. The other one is an arbitrary kind of servomotor, or programmable variable speed motor with a low power, whose motion is controllable and programmable or numerical control. The two different motors synchronized drive said punching mechanism.
An embodiment of the invention also comprises an optimized dimensional design method using energy deployment and motion flexibility as key objective indexes. This new index ensures the configuration parameters reasonable in terms of energy deployment and motion flexibility.
An advantage of an embodiment the present invention is the ability to create a versatile use press that has a programmable drive mechanism which can be modified by numerical control with re-programming without disassembly such that press down time is effectively eliminated.
Another advantage of an embodiment of the present invention is that it has a travel space while traditional mechanical press has only a travel curve. This makes it possible that almost all categories of stamping operations can be completed on a same press.
Another advantage of an embodiment of the present invention is that operation and maintenance costs are low by comparison with programmable hydraulic press or current numerical control mechanical press for there are only little changes in the embodiment of the present invention from the current mechanical press in terms of configuration and drive. An embodiment of present invention is also energy efficient with the usage of flywheel.
A further advantage of an embodiment of the present invention is that manufacturing and assembly errors can be compensated by software with feedback control algorithm without physical adjustment and high accuracy maintains whatever wear happens.
Example embodiment EX-1. A programmable configuration for mechanical press, comprising: a 2 degree-of-freedom planar parallel punching mechanism; and a drive mode with two different motors.
Example embodiment EX-2. The programmable configuration as recited in example embodiment EX-1, further comprising: a corresponding optimized design method to determine said punching mechanism and said driving motors' size; and a track tracing of said servomotor following said common motor to keep synchronized of said two motors.
Example embodiment EX-3. The programmable configuration as recited in example embodiment EX-1, wherein said a 2 degree-of-freedom planar parallel punching mechanism, comprises: a closed five-bar planar parallel drive; and a slide-link group of zero degree-of-freedom.
Example embodiment EX-4. The programmable configuration as recited in example embodiment EX-1, wherein said a drive mode with two different motors comprises: one un-adjustable constant speed motor, namely common motor; and one programmable variable speed motor, namely servomotor or other electrical motor.
Example embodiment EX-5. The programmable configuration as recited in example embodiment EX-2, wherein said a corresponding optimized design method comprises a special objective function characterized with two important indexes: energy (whether moment, power or work) deployment between the two motors and ram motion flexibility including dwelling angle (or time) and adjustable travel range to induce the optimization process, which will lead to a large power requirement of said common motor as well as a low power requirement of said servomotor, and also to a travel space to make press have ability to program travel curves whatever are desired.
Throughout the description and drawings, example embodiments are given with reference to specific configurations. It will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill in the art that the present invention can be embodied in other specific forms. The scope of the present invention, for the purpose of the present patent document, is not limited merely to the specific example embodiments of the foregoing description, but rather is indicated by the appended claims. All changes that come within the meaning and range of equivalents within the claims are to be considered as being embraced within the spirit and scope of the claims.
The present patent application is related to and claims the benefit of priority from commonly-owned, co-pending U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/499,931, filed on Sep. 3, 2003, entitled “Mechanical Press With Controllable Mechanism”, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60499931 | Sep 2003 | US |