This invention relates generally to apparatus, methods and systems for effecting and controlling stroking motion for honing and other applications, and, more particularly, to a servo stroking apparatus and system adapted for optimizing a stoking process and/or profile for a wide variety of applications, particularly for honing.
The main problem in the honing process is related to the position feedback and therefore the derivatives of it (velocity, acceleration and jerk). This problem is presently being solved mostly by using dedicated mechanical systems; where the control is done by setting hard limits locking of any adjusting response or simply offering a faulting output as safety response. This is representative of four bar linkage systems. The fast reciprocating motion makes a close loop control historically difficult and expensive.
The present servo stroking apparatus and system concept is related to the feedback information offered by the servo system and the optimization process related to system dynamic output (position, velocity and acceleration) and tool performance. The stroking process in a honing machine is the relative motion between the honing tool and the work piece. The material removal is produced by the contact of the honing tool with the work piece. The present apparatus and system is related to the significant simplification by using current digital control systems and various schemes to transfer rotational to linear mechanical systems (crank mechanism, four bar linkage). This control process is not limited to a ballscrew application as linear motion mechanism. It could be implemented in any system where the control feedback offered the dynamic output information. Examples of other applications for this process are machine tools where reciprocation is obtained by hydraulic cylinders controlled by a servo valve and position controlled by a linear encoder, and a servo motor link to a chain as motion transfer element.
The following lists are a simplified summary of other known honing systems' limitations and problems.
Known Honing Machine Stroking Technology:
A review of known patents illustrates how the use of electronic/feedback technology is wide spread throughout the machine tool industry. The specifics of the claims of these patents are related to the control and power transmission of this technology to improve or create new processes. The time line of these claims are not related to novel mechanical inventions but to the digital and control improvements produced in systems control and therefore in the machine tool industry. The use of already existent mechanical subsystems and its implementation produced improvements in the final output. Prior art is presented the following example U.S. patents:
Each of the above mentioned patents are representative of improvements in the machine control system. Most illustrative of early systems is U.S. Pat. No. 755,416 C. Tuckfield “Mechanism for converting reciprocating into rotary motion and vice versa”, which shows the cycle motion repetition produced by the cam profile. Also, with the same importance are the U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,143,310 and 4,418,305 patents, Hitachi's “Apparatus for positioning” and “Velocity Feedback Circuit”; where the main improvement is related to the feedback position and velocity, offering control and total dynamic system information.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,816,731 “Honing Machine” by Delapena Honing Equipment Limited, clearly represented the use of digital control technology in a honing machine. The same control is representative of the machining process in other equipment where the limitations were established by the control development not by the process. The mentioned patent clearly addresses all the actual honing technology problems except points 7 and 11 above. These two points are limited in their concept. The complete concept is itself limited by the technology utilized being in principle as slow as their control loop. U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,816,731, 4,621,455, 4,455,789, and 4,423,567 each represent a honing machine where there is a relative motion between the honing tool and the work piece. Also, the honing tool is expanding radially at the same time that rotates. The removal of material is therefore produced by the honing tool surfaces being harder that the work part.
In U.S. Pat. No. 4,816,731, column 7, lines 17 to 44, a unique motion profile is described. This motion profile is sectioned in 6 sub cycles: Forward acceleration, forward steady speed, forward deceleration, backward acceleration, backward steady speed, and backward deceleration. This acceleration profile per cycle produces uncertainties in the jerk output. These uncertainties are reflected in the position profile with inconsistency and vibrations throughout the mechanical components. This position error is clearly encountered by the honing machine of U.S. Pat. No. 4,816,731 (column 8, lines 1 to 14). The vibrations problem is also controlled by reducing possible output. This is described in column 6, lines 15 to 22. The problem is underlined on page 25, section 2.5 of “Cam Design and Manufacturing Handbook” by Robert L. Norton. It says “If we wish to minimize the theoretical peak value of the magnitude of the acceleration function for a given problem, the function that would best satisfy this constraint is the square wave . . . .” This function is also called constant acceleration. This function is not continuous. It has discontinuities at the beginning, middle and end of the interval. So by itself, is unacceptable as a cam acceleration function.”
A schematic representation of this motion profile is shown in
Thus, what is sought is an apparatus and system which overcomes many of the problems and shortcomings set forth above.
The servo stroking system technology of the present invention is intended to overcome many of the problems and shortcomings set forth above by providing one or more of the following advantages and capabilities.
In a preferred aspect of the present invention, the reciprocation of a honing tool is based on a digitalized motion profile representative of one cycle. This profile is optimized to maximize the force applied by the honing tool minimizing the reaction in the structural machine components. This optimization process is not related to the machining process orientation. That is, the same optimization process can be used for a vertical or horizontal process. The main difference will be represented in the addition of the gravity force as input in the vertical case. The optimization is based in the fundamental law of Cam Design. “The jerk function must be finite across the entire interval.” This principle has been in use in Sunnen's honing machines for the last 50 years. In those machines, the principal is mainly implemented by a predetermined center offset within a four bar linkage. Therefore, the reciprocation frequency is established by the rotation speed of the offset point; and the reciprocation displacement of the slider is determined by the pivoting point location. This scheme control is very efficient given that the dynamic profiles are optimized by the use of the simple harmonic cam profile. This profile offers a very good output for short displacements.
The motion control of the present invention will be limited by the systems variables to be optimized (cycle time, profile acceleration, tool performance, material removal, system vibrations). In the same way, the control protocol will be modified to most accurately represent system constraints (work part physical characteristics, honing machine and reciprocation characteristics). To improve performance, the honing process will be divided into subsets where every subset could require an optimized process or profile. Examples of this include the following:
The servo system stroke of the invention is based on a parametric profile curve; this motion profile curve will be scaled depending on the specific stroke length. The reciprocation is based on a digitalized motion profile representative of one honing cycle. That is, one stroke in a first direction, and a return stroke in the opposite direction. This profile can be optimized to maximize the force applied by the honing tool, minimizing the reaction in the structural machine components. This optimization process is not related to the machining process orientation. The same optimization process will be done for a vertical or horizontal process. The main difference will be represented in the addition of the gravity force as input in the vertical case. The optimization is based on the fundamental law of Cam Design. “The jerk function must be finite across the entire interval.”
The present servo system preferably uses a directly coupled system to reduce the number of variables and uncertainties. The motion profile uncertainty is therefore reduced to one joint, a ball nut in the instance wherein the servo is a ball screw. Therefore, the position accuracy is increased substantially.
The motion profile produces a variable position, radial speed and acceleration curve throughout the entire profile. The only necessary limiting factor is set as a safety control for the machine structure integrity. Therefore the process decision is limited to a stroke length, stroke rate and spindle speed to achieve the desired cross-hatch angle and removal rate. The cross-hatch angle can be optimized by synchronizing the spindle motion with the stroker. This relation can be in the same way applying to the tool feed or any other machine servo system. The following schematic represents this interrelation.
The present servo stroker relates the control scheme of the stroker to an independent controller/drive unit, where inputs are related to stroke length, position of stroke, start stroking process and stop stroking process. Therefore the positioning scheme is simplified, thereby reducing operation time. This change increases the reaction time significantly. The motion profile curve is independently verified and controlled from the rest of the machine operation increasing total throughput. This improvement is reflected in system performance by increasing stroke rate output. Two different systems have been tested where the stroker rate (given the mechanical system limitations) got as high as 10 cycles per second for a 25.4 mm stroke. Therefore the refreshing time of the stroker position is 0.2 msec. with a 400 times cycle position check system and 0.09 msec. with a 1024 cycle position check system. The position check table is related to a series of different optimized motion profiles. These profiles are explained in more detail in the following sections. Every one of these profiles are parameterized and related to an absolute position.
Referring now more particularly to the drawings, aspects of preferred embodiments of the invention will be discussed in greater detail. According to the present invention, there are an unlimited number of cam profiles to be used as operating profiles for control of a honing stroke. For example the following cam profiles will be compared: Simplified Harmonic, Cycloidal, Modified Sine, Modified Trapezoidal, Polynomial 345 and Polynomial 4567. Referring to
Referring also to
Referring also to
Referring also to
Referring also to
The present Servo Stroking System is based on the optimization of the stroking process in honing, using the already existing machine tool components. These tools are the following: Servo Control, Digital Control and linear motion system (ball screw, roller screw, linear servomotor, rack and pinion, hydraulic cylinder, chain, belt). The optimization is related to three main groups: honing output (surface finish, bore geometry, part cycle), honing tool (tool geometry, work loads), honing machine components (work loads, life cycles).
The total throughput in a honing machine is controlled by the following elements:
These elements are integrally related to the honing process and desired outcome. The optimum performance of the process is not established and will be different for every specific part to be honed. The system variables are sub grouped into machine control components: stroker, spindle and feed system and tool components: coolant and abrasives. This subdivision establishes a system dependency, relating the tool variables as constraints (defining abrasives and coolant as honing part delimiters, related to surface finish and material removal interactions). These relations only offer the motion control components as possible optimization parameters. For many applications, the main point of optimization is the minimization of the abrasive use with respect to the maximum material removal, producing a minimum production cycle time. This process is independent of the crosshatch angle. The desired cross hatch angle is related to the final section of the honing process. The physical displacement of an abrasive grain throughout the bore produces a helix, as shown in
Here, it should be noted the rotation of a honing tool can also be controlled so as to also follow any cam profile, such as any of those listed above, namely, a simplified harmonic, modified sine, trapezoidal, polynomial, and/or mixed cam profile. And, the cam profile or profiles of the rotation can be coordinated with that of the stroking motion of the tool, for instance to produce a desired cross hatching pattern. In this regard, utilizing the same cam profile for both stroking and rotation of a tool, timed to coincide, has been found to produce a cross hatching pattern which is more uniform along the length of a honed surface.
Referring to
The most significant benefit that is observed of a greater path angle α is the increased surface in the cutting plane of the abrasive grain. Therefore a more aggressive feed force is admissible given the homogeneous distribution along the grain surface. The results are shorter cycles and improved abrasive efficiency or performance. If the feed force is kept constant, the increase in the stroke rate will modify the cutting plane orientation until an optimum angle α is found on the abrasive grain. This angle will produce the best result when the grain is self sharpening by the honing process.
In
Referring also to
As noted previously, an encoder or other device can be utilized for counting rotations of ball screw 36 for determining a longitudinal position of ball nut 42 therealong and thus the longitudinal position of honing tool 34 in a work piece such as work piece 50. From this information that the longitudinal position of tool 34 is determined, and with information relating to the timing of changes in the longitudinal position, velocity, acceleration, and jerk of ball nut 42 and tool 34 can be precisely controlled so as to follow a desired cam profile, such as any of those illustrated in the figures just discussed, as precisely controlled by controller 46. Here, controller 46 is shown connected by conductive paths 62 to servo motor 40 and also drives 58 and 60, for controlling the linear position, velocity, acceleration and jerk profiles of tool 34, and also the direction and speed of rotation of tool 34 through drive 58, as well as the radial expansion and contraction thereof as effected through drive 60.
Referring also to
Referring also to
Referring also to
Referring also to
Referring also to
Thus, there has been shown and described a servo stroking apparatus and system, which overcomes many of the problems set forth above. It will be apparent, however, to those familiar in the art, that many changes, variations, modifications, and other uses and applications for the subject device are possible. All such changes, variations, modifications, and other uses and applications that do not depart from the spirit and scope of the invention are deemed to be covered by the invention which is limited only by the claims which follow.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/582,036, filed Jun. 22, 2004.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2005/022233 | 6/22/2005 | WO | 00 | 11/17/2006 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2006/002305 | 1/5/2006 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
755416 | Tuckfield | Mar 1904 | A |
3126672 | Calvert et al. | Mar 1964 | A |
3404490 | Estabrook | Oct 1968 | A |
3664217 | Schiewek et al. | May 1972 | A |
3736703 | Estabrook et al. | Jun 1973 | A |
4035959 | Vanderwal, Jr. | Jul 1977 | A |
4143310 | Fujinawa et al. | Mar 1979 | A |
4189871 | Rottler et al. | Feb 1980 | A |
4418305 | Otsuki et al. | Nov 1983 | A |
4423567 | Raven, III | Jan 1984 | A |
4455789 | Gehring | Jun 1984 | A |
4534093 | Jahnke et al. | Aug 1985 | A |
4621455 | Sunnen et al. | Nov 1986 | A |
4679357 | Richter et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4816731 | Boulton et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4887221 | Davis et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
5042202 | Klein et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
5426352 | Styfhoorn et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5479354 | Husslein | Dec 1995 | A |
6022132 | Schulz | Feb 2000 | A |
7346973 | Ooe et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080032604 A1 | Feb 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60582036 | Jun 2004 | US |